RAMESHWAR LAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHSAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties we are of the opinion that learned Single Judge was right in finding that no case for invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction is made out.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 4.3.1997 by which the writ petition filed by the appellant petitioner claiming a relief on the basis of his services being terminated without complying with pre-requisites of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act of 1947') was dismissed.

(3.) According to the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner was first employed as daily rated workman for a period of 3 months from June, 1989. After the expiry of that period, he was again given an appointment in November, 1991 and pursuant thereto he continued in service upto January, 1992. Again third time, the petitioner was given appointment vide order dated 13/16.4.1992 in pursuance of which he joined as daily rated workman on 20.4.92 on daily wage of Rs.25/- per days. Notwithstanding the expiry of the aforesaid period, his services were confirmed by an oral order which fact has been denied by the respondents in their reply. The averments contained in this regard are that vide order dated 22.3.93 which was ex post facto appointment order, his services as part-time Patwari was considered from December, 1992 to Feb. 1993. Thus, on the basis of continuous working from 20.6.1992 to 4.3.93 i.e. about 10 months period, it was claimed by the petitioner that he had actually worked for 240 days in the 12 months immediately preceding the date of termination of services i.e. 22.3.1993. Therefore he was entitled to protection available to him under Section 25-F of the Act of 1947, but the same was not extended to him.