- (1.) Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties. The intra Court appeal has been preferred as against the order dated 3.12.2002 passed by Single Bench in Civil Writ Petition No. 4285/2001, whereby the Single Bench while allowing the writ application has set aside the award dated 6.1.2000 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jaipur (for short, 'the Tribunal'). The Tribunal has ordered reinstatement of the workman with 50% back wages besides treating him in service without break. The Single Bench has set aside the award passed by the Tribunal on the ground that in case engagement was not as per rules, order of reinstatement could not be passed; burden was upon the workman to prove that he had served continuously for 240 days in the preceding year without interruption, which was not discharged. Facts, in short, are that the workman was engaged as Class IVth employee w.e.f. 28.6.1989; his services were terminated on 8.9.1992 without making compliance of the provisions of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1947') Conciliation proceedings were undertaken wherein the employer had admitted that the workman had rendered continuous service on part-time basis during the aforesaid period. However, he had served on full time basis only for 78 days. On failure of conciliation proceedings, the matter was referred to the Tribunal for adjudication in the year 1998. The conciliation officer was approached in the year 1996 by the workman as he had travelled to this Court in the year 1993 by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 743/1993, which was dismissed vide order dated 1.11.1996 on the ground of availability of alternative remedy. The workman raised industrial dispute in the year 1996 itself as apparent from the notice issued by the Ministry of Labour, Government of India.
(2.) In the reply filed by the respondents, it was stated that the workman had rendered service for 78 days on full time basis not for 240 days.
(3.) The Tribunal has considered the evidence adduced by the parties and the admission made before the conciliation officer by the employer that continuous services were rendered on part-time basis for the period from 28.6.1989 to 8.9.1992; during the aforesaid period, 78 days' services were rendered on full time basis. Relying upon the aforesaid admission of employer and the evidence adduced by the workman, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that continuous services were rendered by workman for 240 days in preceding year. Thus, direction was issued with respect to grant of back wages. While framing issue No. 6, the Tribunal has found that the workman has not been cross-examined on the statement which he has made with respect to the fact that he was not gainfully employed elsewhere after termination of his services. The dispute was raised by the workman belatedly as he has initially approached the High Court by way of filing the writ petition as referred to above; after dismissal of the same in the year 1996 on the ground of availability of alternative remedy, he filed application for conciliation in the year 1996 itself.;