- (1.) This petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the Karnal Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Karnal (for short the 'Bank') challenging the award of the Labour Court dated December 7, 1992 whereby the termination of services of the workman-respondent was held to be unjustified and he was directed to be reinstated with continuity of service and full back wages.
(2.) The undisputed facts are that Mohinder Pal, respondent (hereinafter to be called as 'workman') was appointed as Secretary for a fixed period of 89 days on a consolidated salary of Rs. 500/- per month. On the expiry of this period he was again appointed for another period of 89 days on the same terms and conditions and was given yet another term of 89 days whereafter his services were terminated. The workman challenged his termination by raising an industrial dispute and the same was referred for adjudication to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rohtak. The Labour Court after recording evidence of the parties and hearing their representatives held that termination of the services of the workman was illegal since the Bank did not comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( for short the 'Act') before retrenching the respondent. In view of this finding, the Bank was directed to reinstate the workman with continuity of service and full back wages. This award has been impugned in the present writ petition.
(3.) The only contention raised on behalf of the Bank is that the workman had been employed each time for a fixed term and on the expiry of the said term his services automatically came to an end and as such the termination did not fall within the definition of retrenchment in view of the provisions of Section 2(oo) (bb) of the Act. The argument is that it was, therefore, not necessary for the Bank to comply with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act.;