BHOOP SINGH Vs. HRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the award dated 19.8.2009 passed by the Labour Court, Shimla. At the outset, I am constrained to observe that the learned Labour Court has not even cared to go through the documents placed on record. The learned Labour Court vide order dated 9.3.2009 rightly permitted the petitioner to place on record the information of mandays chart which he had obtained under the Right to Information Act. The main question which arose for decision in the case was whether the petitioner had

(2.) COMPLETED 240 days of service in the twelve calendar months preceding his termination and, therefore, whether the termination of his services without following the procedure laid down under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was illegal. The learned Labour Court has made a passing reference to the information obtained by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act in his award and has recorded that the petitioner has failed to prove on record that he had worked for 240 days in the twelve calender months preceding the termination of his services. This clearly shows that the learned Labour Court did not even care to go through the record. His muster-roll and attendance register have been placed on record even in this Court. These were a part of the record of the learned Labour Court also and this record shows that in the twelve months, prior to his termination, he had worked for 285 days. Even if we take the period from April, 2000 to March, 2001 into consideration, the petitioner worked for 30 days in April, 2000, 30 days in May, 30 days in June, 30 days in August, 30 days in September, 30 days in November, 31 days in December, 30 days in January, 2001, 15 days in February and 31 days in March. Therefore, the total days