- (1.) IN the instant writ petition, the petitioner has projected a challenge to the legality and validity of the award dated 4th June, 2012, passed by the Labour Court, Jaipur, Rajasthan, answering the reference in negative and against the petitioner -workman.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the indispensable skeletal materials facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised needs to be first noticed. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that she was engaged as 'Cook' with effect from September, 1997, on a consolidated wages/salary of Rs.600/ - per month. She worked continuously up till 30th September, 2001, and thus, completed more than 240 days in the calender year preceding termination of her employment with effect from 30th September, 2001. On a reference made by the State Government, the petitioner submitted her statement of claim, which was responded by the respondent -employer, resisting the claim of the petitioner.
(3.) THE Labour Court taking into consideration the pleaded facts, the evidence adduced by the parties and upon hearing the representatives of the parties, made the impugned award dated 4th June, 2012, holding that the petitioner did not complete 240 days of service, in the calender year preceding the date of termination i.e. 1st August, 2001. Further, in view of the fact that the petitioner -workman worked upto 30th September, 1999, the claim could not be sustained in the eye of law. Learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the pleaded facts and grounds of the writ application, while assailing the legality and validity of the impugned award streneously argued that the impugned award is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the facts, evidence and materials available on record and therefore, is not sustainable and needs to be interfeared with in exercise of writ jurisdiction.;