SUNDER SINGH Vs. P.O. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-I

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has assailed the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal I, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi dated 12.06.1997 in ID No.838/89, whereby the reference made by the appropriate government dated 09.11.1989 regarding the termination of the services of the petitioner has been answered against the petitioner workman and in favour of the respondent management.

(2.) The admitted facts are that the petitioner was appointed by an office order dated 06.08.1987 initially for a period of six months or until appointment of a regular employee as Beldar in the dog destruction gang. The appointment was purely temporary and liable to be terminated without any notice. By another office order dated 19.02.1988, the petitioners appointment was extended by another six months from 04.02.1988. Once again, the appointment was made on purely temporary basis and liable for termination without notice.

(3.) The services of the petitioner were similarly extended for a period of six months from 04.08.1988; and for two periods of three months each from 04.11.1988 and 31.01.1989. The services were terminated with effect from 01.02.1989. The petitioner claimed that he had served for over 240 days in the year preceding to his termination and raised an industrial dispute claiming breach of sections 25F,G&H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act) read with Rule 76 and 77 of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957.