JAI RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and with his assistance have gone through the records.

(2.) Some facts can be noticed in the following manner :-

(3.) The case set up by the petitioner, in short, is that he worked as tractor driver for several years; though he did not have the requisite qualification for the post of a tractor driver but on account of his experience for the said post he was entitled to be regularised as a tractor driver. In support of this contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the order of the Labour court passed in an application filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as Gujarat Agricultural University v. Rathod Labhu Bechar and others, 2001 2 SCT 394 and our attention has been invited to para No. 27 of the judgment, which is reproduced as under :-