- (1.) THE award dated 9. 7. 1985 passed by the Presiding officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Kanpur in adjudication case No. 108 of 1980 and 196 of 1981 has been challenged by means of this writ petition. The petitioner's case, inter-alia, was that he was a son of an employee of the Central bank of India which had been following a policy of giving preference in the matter of appointment to the sons of its employees. The petitioner had worked for more than 240 days in a period of one year and had continued to work for three consecutive years. Pursuant to the said policy the petitioner was permitted to appear in a selection test in which he was successful. But subsequently, on the basis of a judgment of the Delhi High Court, the policy was reversed by a Circular dated 19. 4. 1976 issued by the Government of India, Department of Revenue (Banking Wing) (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) wherein the giving of preference to the sons and daughters of employees in future recruitment was discontinued. Admittedly, the petitioner was not recruited till then.
(2.) BY means of the impugned award the petitioner's claim was negatived because of the said circular, inter-alia on the finding that the petitioner did not complete 240 days of service within a period of one year and that by reason of such circular the petitioner could not have any vested right to appointment.
(3.) M. K. P. Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the said award very fairly conceded that from the certificate granted to the petitioner it appears that the petitioner had worked only for 170 days within a period spreading over 3 years. Therefore, the question of 240 days cannot be espoused. In his usual fairness he did not press the said issue.;