- (1.) Appellants challenge correctness of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the appellants. By the impugned judgment the Division Bench upheld the decision of learned Single Judge.
(2.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows : State of Gujarat had made a reference to the Labour Court, Surendra Nagar under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the 'Act')basically on the question whether the alleged termination of the services of the respondents was valid. Claim of the respondents was that they had worked for various period beyond 240 days in each of the years right from the beginning and therefore, the discharge from service of the respondents by oral intimation was not valid. Appellants refuted the stand by stating that the nature of the work was purely on daily wages basis depending upon both on work and funds. They specifically pleaded that none of the respondents had completed 240 days in any of the years right from the beginning. As work was not available they were orally asked not to come for work, and there was thus no retrenchment or termination. There was no appearance on behalf of respondent in spite of notice.
(3.) The labour court noted that the details pertaining to attendance of the respondent have been produced, and zerox copies of the salary register and muster roll have also produced. The labour court came to hold that the workman's plea in each case that he had worked for various periods for more than 240 days in a year was established and there was non-compliance of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the 'Act') and as such termination was illegal. They were awarded back wages. The writ petitions filed were dismissed and so was the Letters Patent Appeal as indicated above.;