BADAL PRASAD Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the present petition the Petitioner seeks setting aside of the award dated 6th September, 2009 passed by the learned Labour Court wherein it was held that the workman has failed to prove that he had worked for 240 days during the preceding 12 months and the services of the workman were terminated illegally or unjustifiably by the management and thus he was not entitled to any relief.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the Petitioner contends that the learned Trial Court failed to peruse the documents and evidence placed on record which clearly establishes the fact that the Petitioner/workman was employed from 10th November, 1986 and not 1st April, 1988. Even if the date of appointment is treated as 1st April 1988, the number of days till 12th May, 1989 when his services were illegally terminated would be more than 240 days, as such the learned Labour Court has committed an error in computing the number of days on which the Petitioner has worked. Although, the date of entry mentioned in the pucca ESI Card is 1st April, 1988, however prior to this, a kachcha ESI Card was also issued to the Petitioner/ workman which confirms the fact that the workman joined much earlier. It was lastly contended that the Petitioner/ workman after joining the management had applied for loan of Rs. 2,500/- vide his request dated 15th February, 1988. This application also bears the signature of Senior Engineer Mr. Wadhwa which substantiates the fact of Petitioner joining service much prior to 1 st April, 1988 i.e. the date mentioned on the ESI Card. However, this document too was not taken into consideration by the learned Trial Court while passing the impugned award.

(3.) IN R.M. Yellatti (supra) the Honble Supreme Court has held: