D.P. Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) Pleadings are complete and the Counsels agree that the writ petition itself may be disposed off finally under the Rules of the Court.
(3.) Brief facts for the decision of this petition are that the respondent No. 2 was employed in a World Bank Financed Project "Social Forestry Scheme" for plantation of trees as Chawkidar/Watcher. The workman alleged that he had continuously worked between August, 1988 to February, 1990. It was further alleged that without complying with the provisions of U.P. Industrial Dispute; Act, 1947, he was disengaged w.e.f. 1st of March, 1990. On these allegations, tie workman approached the Conciliation Officer and upon a failure report the State Government made a reference under section 4-K of the Act which was registered as Adjudication Case No. 131 of 1991. Before the Labour Court, the workman reiterated his stand that since he had worked for 240 days in the last twelve calendar months, he was entitled to the benefit of sections 6-N, 6-P and 6-R of the Industrial Disputes Act. It was also urged that since the mandatory provision had not been complied with, he was entitled for reinstatement. The petitioner denied the allegations of the workman and averred that the workman had not completed 240 days in the last twelve calender months. It was also stated that the scheme was a temporary scheme financed by the World Bank and once the project came to an end all employees working therein stood autocratically disengaged as their employment was co-terminus with the project. Further, tin contention was that the project in which the workman had been employed and also the department was not an Industry and, therefore, the provisions of the Act would not apply to the case of the workman.;