STATESMAN LIMITED Vs. EIGHTH INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .The respondent No. 2 was a casual employee of the Statesman Limited. He was appointed on July 16, 1982 and was discharged from service on May 1, 1997. According to the workman he completed 240 days work in a calendar year to fulfil the requirement of Section 25-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act, 1947"). According to him since he fulfilled the requirement of Section 25-B he was entitled to a notice under Section 25-F which was not served upon him. Hence, the discharge from service and/or retrenchment was illegal.

(2.) . The workman raised an industrial dispute. The State Government made a reference to the Industrial Tribunal under the provisions of the said Act, 1947.

(3.) . Before the Tribunal it was the categoric case of the workman that he completed 240 days to make the requirement of Section 25-B of the said Act, 1947 and as such he was entitled to a notice under Section 25-F which was not: given.