T S RENUKA S/O LATE T R SIDDALINGAIAH Vs. THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY REGION 1, KARMIKA BHAVANA BANNERGHATTA RAOD, BANGALORE - 560026, THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has called in question the order of the Controlling Authority dated 28.4.2009 produced at Annexure -B and the order of the Appellate Authority dated 14.6.2010 produced at Annexure -C passed under Payment of Gratuity Act. Both the authorities concurrently have rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner, while he was working as a badli, has not proved that he has worked for 240 days in a year and accordingly, his services as a badli was not considered.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had worked as a badli. The petitioner has stated that he has worked for 240 days in a year, however, no record, to the contrary, has been produced by the Corporation to prove that the petitioner has worked less than 240 days.

(3.) THE said judgment of this Court was confirmed in WA No. 1503/2009 on 18.11.2009. In view of the same, the burden is on the Corporation and Corporation has not proved it. Hence, both the impugned orders are liable to be quashed.