MOHD. ALI Vs. THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER the period of 240 days as specified under Section 25 -B(2) read with Section 25 -F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (for short 'the Act') is restricted to immediately preceding calendar year or the said provisions would be attracted even in cases where a workman has worked for 240 days in any calendar year preceding his termination, is the moot question involved in the present appeal?

(2.) UNDISPUTEDLY , the appellant had been appointed in 1980 and his services have been dispensed with in the year 1990. He had worked for 240 days in calendar years 1980, 1981, 1982 and 1986 to 1989 and when his services were retrenched in the year 1991, he had not completed 240 days of service. The appellant approached the Labour Court, who set aside the order of retrenchment and ordered his reinstatement in service along with seniority and continuity in service, however back wages in service were denied.

(3.) BEFORE we proceed any further, it will be relevant to make note of the relevant provisions of the Act as attracted to the facts of the present case. Sections 2(oo), 25 -B and 25 -F of the Act read thus: -