U P STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. PANCHHI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the U. P. State Electricity Board, the employer -petitioner, challenges the award of the Labour Court IV, Uttar Pradesh, Kanpur, dated 12th March, 1995, passed in Adjudication Case No. 256 of 1989.

(2.) THE following dispute was referred to the labour court for adjudication : .........[vernacular ommited text]...........

(3.) THE employer have set up the case that the concerned workman was employed on different post in the leave vacancy for a fixed period and after expiry of the aforesaid period, his services were automatically terminated. At the moment, when the services of the concerned workman was terminated, there was no vacant post of driver. In this way, the services of the concerned workman were not terminated but it has come to an end automatically. With regard to the concerned workman's claim that he has worked for more than 240 days in the preceding 12 calendar months, the employer has given details. According to that details, the concerned workman has worked for 176 days. Therefore, it was not necessary for the employer to comply with the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, hereinafter called the 'Central Act', or Section 6N of the Act.