- (1.) Heard Dr. R.G.Padia tor the appellant and Sri V.R. Agarwal for respondents.
(2.) Feeling aggrieved by the Judgment dated December 10, 1996 of CivilMisc. Writ Petition No. 16758 of 1996 rejecting the 'petitioner's claim for regularisation of service and dismissing the writ petition, the petitioner has filed this appeal assailing the said judgment.
(3.) On perusal of the judgment and on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as stated in the pleadings of the parties, it is clear to us that the petitioner's appointment as a volley-ball coach was for a fixed term and fresh orders of term appointment were being issued from year to year. The question for consideration is whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act is applicable. This question, in our considered view, can be more appropriately considered by the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal. Therefore, while declining to interfere with the impugned judgment, we make it clear that the judgment will not prevent the petitioner appellant from approaching the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal in accordance with law for redressal of his grievance. In case the matter is placed before the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal for the adjudication, the Court/Tribunal will decide the case on the basis of the material placed before it without being influenced by the findings recorded in the judgment and in this order.;