DINESH MAHESHWARI, J. - (1.) THIS intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 19.07.2005 passed in CWP No.1283/1999 whereby the learned Single Judge of this Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant in challenge to the award dated 06.03.1999 whereby the Labour Court, Bhilwara answered the reference in favour of the workman (respondent No.2 herein) and directed his reinstatement with effect from 01.05.1988 with 50% backwages. Shorn of unnecessary details, the relevant background aspects of the matter could be noticed in the following: The reference as made by the Government under the notification dated 04.04.1997 in relation to the grievance of the respondent No.2 had been as under:- " , " 1-5-88 ? " ?"
(2.) THE respondent No.2 had earlier filed a writ petition (CWP No.2016/1989) challenging the alleged oral order of termination of his services after 30.04.1988. However, the writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 15.02.1996 on the ground that the alternative remedy, of raising industrial dispute before the appropriate Government, was available. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 raised the dispute and hence, the aforesaid reference came to be made to the Labour Court, Bhilwara. The respondent No.2 submitted before the Labour Court that he was employed by the District Treasury Officer on daily wages with effect from 01.02.1986 for carrying out the job of a Lower Division Clerk ('LDC'); and he continued to work as such until 30.04.1988, when his services were abruptly terminated by an oral order.
(3.) THE appellant countered the submissions so made with the assertions that the respondent No.2 was not engaged as an LDC but worked only as a daily-rated employee at the wages of Rs.25.00 per day for a short period between 01.02.1986 to 30.04.1988. It was also submitted that LDCs were appointed in the department by the State Government through the Public Service Commission; and that the Treasury Department did not come within the definition of industry and, therefore, the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('the Act'/'the Act of 1947') were not attracted in the matter.;