KINETIC ENGINEERING LTD Vs. BARKU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These matters are heard at length.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgments of the Industrial Court by which the ULP complaints filed by the respondents have been allowed. The respondents/original complainants have been granted permanency in employment with all benefits. Though all of them have been working intermittently as per the appointment letters issued to them, the breaks in service of about 12 months to 3 years have been bridged by the Industrial Court, which has concluded that they have worked continuously in the employment of the petitioner industry. The petitioner contends that the impugned judgments are unsustainable.

(3.) In the first petition, the original complainant is Barku Zumbar Borude. Before approaching the Industrial Court by filing a complaint for seeking permanency, he had worked as per the chart supplied by him as under :-