- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24.8.2001 whereby the Writ petition of the appellant-Bank was dismissed while upholding the award passed by the Labour Court.
(2.) It is a case where a dispute was raised by the non-appellant-workman, regarding his termination/discontinuation from service w.e.f. 26.11.1993 and not to consider his case for regular appointment. It was stated that non-appellant-workman was initially engaged from 3.10.1989 till 12.10.1990 in Dabi branch of the Bank followed by engagement in Rampura branch for 55 days, 2 days in Gulabpura branch and thereafter in Jhalawar Road branch. The workman-employee was thereafter engaged from 8.12.1992 to 7.11.1993 in Dabi branch and thereafter from 8.11.1993 to 26.11.1993 in Jhalawar Road branch. The dispute was raised alleging violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') as well as violation of Rules 77 of the Rules. A claim for regular appointment was also made by the workman-employee non-appellant (for short 'the workman'). A reply to the statement of claim was filed stating that the workman-employee was lastly engaged in Jhalawar branch where he had not worked for 240 days in a year, therefore, claim of the workman-employee was denied in all respects. The plea of the appellant was that the workman concerned was engaged for a particular period as daily rated employee, thus his services come to an end with the expiry of the period, hence, it does not fall within the definition of 'retrenchment' as provided under Section 2(oo) of the Act.
(3.) Learned Labour Court came to the conclusion that before termination of the services of the workman concerned, he had worked for 240 days in a year and as provisions of Section 25-F of the Act has not been complied with, termination/discontinuation of the workman-employee becomes illegal and accordingly order of reinstatement with back wages with other benefit was passed.;