Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J. - (1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the award dated March 15, 2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, in I.D. Case No. 40 of 2000.
(2.) The respondent No. 1 was employed as waiter for a period of six months with effect from the date of his joining by an Order No. 669 dated October 3, 1997. The contract of employment was renewed from time to time. Lastly, the contract was renewed, by an Order No. 732 dated October 29,1999, up to October 31, 1999. Since the contract of employment was not renewed, disputes and differences arose between the employer and the workman concerned and ultimately, a reference was made to the Labour Court. The Labour Court was requested to adjudicate as to whether the action of the management in terminating the service of the respondent No. 1 was legal and justified and what relief the workman concerned was entitled to.
(3.) The learned Presiding Officer noted in the award that the workman was appointed on contract basis. The Presiding Officer held that the termination of service of the workman was neither legal nor justified and he was entitled to reinstatement in service. In passing the award, the learned Presiding Officer held that the concept of automatic termination in terms of the standing order was no longer good; the service of the workman was terminated without complying with the provisions of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Presiding Officer, further, found that the workman completed more than 240 (two hundred forty) days of continuous service during the period of 12(twelve) calendar months.;