S R BHARAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Special Civil Application arises out of the judgment and orders of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Ahmedabad Bench, dated 12-03-1998/25-06-1998, in Original Application No.120 of 1992/Review Application No.21 of 1998, holding that petitioner is not entitled to Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? protection under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short `the I.D.Act'), particularly Section 25F.

(2.) Petitioner submits that he was selected after following the due procedure and given appointment against vacant post of Telephone Operator, vide order dated 21-11-1983. However, his services were terminated orally from 31-12-1989, although he had been working continuously as Telephone Operator. Aggrieved by the termination, he preferred Original Application No.120 of 1992 before the CAT, but vide order dated 12-03-1998, the Application was rejected. Review Application No.21 of 1998 was also rejected on 25-06-1998 in a mechanical way, without properly considering the questions raised.

(3.) Respondents opposed the Application and stated that CAT has no jurisdiction to entertain the Application, which, otherwise is barred by limitation; petitioner was initially working on hourly rate basis at Visavadar, later, this arrangement was discontinued on account of surplus staff in the District and automation of the Exchange; he was not regularly appointed, his services were to be utilised on hourly rate basis when there was shortfall in the strength of Telephone Operators due to the vacancies and he was relieved from service from 28-05-1985 and not from 1990, as suggested by the petitioner.