STATE OF U P Vs. PYARE LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. P. Singh, J. Heard Counsel for the parties. This writ petition is directed against the Labour Court award dated 3-6-1995 whereby the claim of the respondent workman has been accepted and relief of reinstatement with back wages has been granted.

(2.) IT appears that the respondent workman was working on daily wage basis in the Irrigation Department of the State of U. P.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner has next urged that the case as set up in the written statement was that the workman was a daily wage employee who was engaged from time to time whenever work was available but the Labour Court without recording a finding that the workman had continuously worked for 240 days in the last 12 calendar months, it has granted relief of full back wages which was illegal. However, learned Counsel for the respondent workman has vehemently urged that there was a statement on his behalf that he has continuously been working for three years and it has also been recorded by the Labour Court. THE Labour Court in its finding has said that the workman has worked for nearly three years but no finding has been recorded that he worked continuously for 240 days in the last 12 calendar months. THE Apex Court in the case of Range Forest Officer v. S. T. Hadimani (2002 (94) F. L. R. 622) has held that where the employer disputes the continuous working of the workman, the burden is upon the workman to prove by cogent evidence that he has worked for 240 days continuously for the last 12 calendar months.