SARVESH KUMAR Vs. LABOUR COURT, BATHINDA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The workman has filed this Letters Patent Appeal against the order dated 29.8.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby Civil Writ Petition No. 15957 of 2011, filed by the appellant for quashing the award dated 3.6.2010 (Annexure P-4), passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Bathinda, answering the reference against the appellant, was dismissed.

(2.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the impugned order as well as the award of the Labour Court, we do not find any merit in this appeal.

(3.) In this case, the workman claimed that he had served with the respondents as Watchman from 1.5.1995 to 15.7.1997. Thus, in spite of the fact that he worked for more than 240 days in one calendar year, his services were terminated without complying with the provision of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). However, the Labour Court, after considering the evidence led by the parties, came to the conclusion that as per the evidence produced by the managment, in one calendar year, the workman had worked with the management only for 211 days on the basis of daily wages. It was found that the workman failed to establish that he had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year. While coming to the said conclusion, the reference was decided against the workman. The award of the Labour Court was affirmed by the learned Single Judge.