ADMINISTRATOR AND SECRETARY Vs. JUDGE LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an employer's appeal against the decision of a learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition filed against the Tribunal's order passed in favour of the workman holding that the termination of the workman's service is invalid. It was held that the petitioner had already completed 240 days continuous employment and, therefore, the termination of his service in this manner was invalid. The Tribunal's decision has been affirmed by the learned Single Judge.

(2.) THE first contention of the counsel for the appellant is that the initial appointment of the workman being defective, there is no question of attracting Section 25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The learned Single Judge has stated that this point not being raised before the Tribunal, it could not be permitted to be raised in the writ petition The same reasoning applied with greater force in this special appeal. Learned Counsel tried to contend that the point was raised before the Tribunal in a different form. Admittedly, the point finds no mention in the Tribunal's order and it is sufficient to support the order of the learned Single Judge that it was not raised before the Tribunal For this reason alone, this new point cannot be raised. That apart, the admitted position is that the workmen did work continuously for more than 240 days as if he had been validly appointed, In view of this factual position, this objection is wholly unwarranted and was rightly rejected in a writ petition. The learned Counsel then contended that appointment was for a fixed term on account of which Section 25(F)(a) does not apply. This point does not appear to have been even raised before the learned Single Judge since it does not find place in his order. The same cannot, therefore, be permitted to be raised now. The fact of continuous service of more than 240 days being admitted the consequence naturally flowing from it must follow. In our opinion, the learned Single Judge was right in refusing to exercise the extraordinary writ jurisdiction in the employer's favour in the face of these admitted facts.