[2026:RJ-JP:3561] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1010/2009 Rajesh Kumar Mehra Son of Shri Motilal Mehra, resident of Mehra Bhawan, Dhanna Talai, Tonk ----Petitioner Versus 1. Judge Labour Court No. 2, Jaipur 2. State Sangthan Ayukta Scout and Guide, State Head Office Jaipur 3. Circle Organizer (Scout) Rajasthan State Bharat Scout and Guide Baggi Khana Tonk ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Gupta for Mr. M.F. Baig For Respondent(s) : Mr. Utkarsh Meena for Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 27/01/2026 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging award dated 25.03.2008 passed by the Labour Court No.2, Jaipur (hereinafter to be referred as 'Labour Court'), whereby a reference relating to legality and validity of termination of his services with effect from 01.04.2000, has been answered in negative by the Labour Court against the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially engaged as clerk in the respondent- Department, however, his services were terminated in utter violation of provisions of Section 25(F), 25(G) and 25(H) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the [2026:RJ-JP:3561] (2 of 3) [CW-1010/2009] Rules of 1947'). Being aggrieved, he raised an industrial disputes, which was referred by appropriate Government to the Labour Court. The Labour Court has answered the reference against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that while passing the award, proper opportunity to lead evidence was not given to the petitioner, therefore, he was not in a position to prove the contents of statements of claim. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents while opposing the writ petition, defended the award dated 25.03.2008 and submitted that the award has been passed by the Labour Court strictly in accordance with law after appreciating the pleadings and facts of the case and since, no evidence was ever led by the petitioner to prove the allegations levelled in statements of claim. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. While passing award dated 25.03.2008, the Labour Court has recorded that despite giving several opportunities for almost four years, the petitioner-workman has failed to submit any kind of evidence to prove the contents of statements of claim. It is settled that merely allegation in the statements of claim is not enough to prove that the termination is illegal. The factum with regard to violation of Section 25(F), 25(G) and 25(H) of the Rules of 1947 are factual in nature, which are to be proved by way of leading evidence. 6. In the instant case, since after giving such opportunities, petitioner could not produce any evidence, no mistake whatsoever has been committed by learned Tribunal in passing the award dated 25.03.2008. [2026:RJ-JP:3561] (3 of 3) [CW-1010/2009] 7. This Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India cannot appreciate the factual dispute without there being any evidence on record of the Labour Court. 8. In the light of above, the instant writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed being devoid of any merit and substance. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /42