CIPLA LTD Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the reference order No.11-2 of 1993 issued by respondent No.2 as well as for quashing of order dated 16.6.2009, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Shimla, vide which issues were framed and the case was fixed for petitioner's evidence.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case leading to the filing of the present petition are that respondent No.3 was appointed as a workman on temporary basis by the petitioners on a fixed salary and allowances vide letter dated April 6, 2005. It was clearly alleged in the said letter that this appointment was on temporary basis due to temporary increase in work and the period of employment was from April 6, 2005 to October 5, 2005, as is clear from Annexure R-1. It was contained in condition No.7 that during this temporary period, the services of respondent No.3 may be terminated without any reason. Thereafter, it appears that vide letter dated October, 28, 2005 (Annexure PB), respondent No.3 was appointed as "Trainee" under "Skill Development and Training Scheme". It was stated therein that respondent No.3 will undergo training for a period of 2 years from November 7, 2005 to November 6, 2007. It was mentioned therein that on completion of this period, this training would automatically come to an end. The question of being absorbed was to be considered based on the performance during the training period and subject to availability of vacancy. Condition No.10, as contained in letter dated 28.10.2005, is reproduced as under:

(3.) THEREAFTER, a reference was made by the private respondent to the Labour Commissioner, who passed by following order: