S.R. Singh, J. - (1.) Subject mutter of impugnment in the instant petition is the Award dated May 10, 1995 published on July 13, 1995 rendered by the Labour Court. Kanpur, in Adjudication Case No. (52 of 1993 consequent upon Reference by the Stale Govt. under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 (In short the 'Act') vide order dated July 5, 1993. The dispute referred to the Labourcourt is extracted below: ^^D;k lsok;kstdksa }kjk Jfed Jh egs'k pUn fuxe iq= Jhxaxk fuxe lsYl eSu dks fnukad 8&8&88 ls dk;Z ls izFke@ cafpr fd;k tkuk mfpr ,oa oS/kkfud gS\ ;fn gks rkslacfU/kr Jfed dk fgrYkkHk@{kfriwfrZ ikus dk vf/kdkjhgS \ fdl frfFk ,oa vU; fdl fooj.k ds lkFk \**
(2.) The Labour Court by means of the impugned Award has tilted the scale of justice in favour of the second respondent. It recorded a finding, vide order dated January 12, 1994 passed on application 9-D moved on behalf of the workman for summoning his personal file, that it was not in dispute that the workman (second respondent) was in the employment of the petitioner from November 1, 1987 to August 8, 1988. It has been held., vide Award in question that the period between November 1, 1987 to August 8, 1988 during which the workman worked as Salesman, had ripened into 240 days though under an unfair labour practice, his name was not shown in the muster roll maintained in the establishment and since the name of workman was not enumerated in the muster roll of the petitioner's establishment he would according to the Labour Court, be deemed to have been employed in permanent capacity and his services were dispensed with in a manner militating against the fair labour practice.
(3.) Sri V.K.Birla counsel for the petitioner canvassed that since the respondent - workman had not endured in continuous service "for not less than one year" under the petitioner, the provisions of Section 6N of the Act would not be attracted even if the respondent - workman be held to have completed 240 days of service in broken bits during his employment under the petitioner from November 1, 1987 to August 8, 1988. To paraphrase it, Sri Birla urged that as a condition precedent to the applicability of Section 6-N of the Act, two things have to be reckoned with viz. (i) the workman had been in employment "in continuous service for not less than one year under the employer" and (ii) during this period of one year of his employment, the workman had completed not less than 240 days of continuous service.;