R.P.VYAS, J. - (1.) THE instant petition has been filed by the petitioner praying, inter alia, therein that the award dated June 6, 2003 (Annex.P/1), passed by the Labour Court may be quashed and set aside and the claim petition of Respondent No. 2 -Neena Agarwal (applicant) may be rejected.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to the instant petition as alleged by the Petitioner -Regional Manager, RIICO Ltd., are that (the applicant -respondent No. 2 was appointed on a fixed pay in the year, 1996, in the Office of RIICO, Abu Road, through M/s. Private Security Services, Abu Road, on contract basis, where, she was given the work of Stenographer/Junior Assistant. The applicant worked till December 31, 1998. On 31st December, 1998, her services were terminated by a verbal order. During the course of conciliation, the Petitioner -RIICO admitted that she was given work on contract basis through M/s. Private Security Services, Abu Road and that contract came to an end in the month of July, 1998. The applicant -respondent No. 2 stated that she worked for 240 days, but prior to termination of her services, neither she was given a Notice of one month, nor retrenchment amount in lieu of one month notice was given to her.
(3.) IT was submitted by the Regional Manager, RIICO Ltd., Abu Road, that in the year, 1996, the applicant -respondent No. 2 was given work on contract basis through Security Services and the RIICO did not give any appointment to the respondent No. 2. Not only that, even no relationship of employer and employee was established with the applicant -respondent No. 2. The contract of the respondent No. 2 was with the Security Services, which came to an end automatically on the expiry of contract period. It Was also stated that the respondent No. 2 has not worked for 240 days, as alleged by her in the memo of claim. After expiry of the contract period with the Security Services, the respondent No. 2 did not carry out any work with RIICO.;