D.G.R.PATNAIK,J. - (1.) Both these Letters Patent Appeals filed by the appellant Food Corporation of India are directed against a common judgment dated 19.5.2005 passed by a learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 5857 of 1997 and CWJC No. 4497 of 1997 whereby both the writ petitions filed by the Management/ appellant herein against the Awards of the Industnal Tribunal no. 1 in favour of the respondent workmen in Reference case No. 96 of 1992 and Reference Case No. 108 of 1992 respectively, were dismissed.
(2.) THE case of the workman in CWJC No. 5857 of 1997 relating to Reference Case No. 96 of 1992. is that he was employed as a casual typist in the district office of the Food Corporation of India on 5.9.1986 and worked there till 27.7.1990. But from 28.7.1990 he was stopped by the Management from working. He was paid wages up to 15.5.1990 and thereafter no payment was made to him and on the contrary. his name was struck off from the Rolls from 15.5.1990. His assertion was that he had worked for more than 240 days during 12 calendar months and yet without issuance of notice or payment of retrenchment compensation as provided under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, he was retrenched from service. The Management of the Food Corporation of India contested the claim of the workmen by making counter assertion that the workman concerned was an independent professional Typist working in the Civil Court at Laheria Serai (Darbhanga) and the Management of the Food Corporation of India used to get some papers typed by him occasionally as and when required. He was not performing any regular typing work or clerical job nor was he ever given regular employment under the Food Corporation of India. The dispute was referred to the Tribunal for adjudication on the following terms of reference: - "Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India, Laheria Serai, Darbhanga, in retrenching Shri Govind Kumar Choudhary who was working as a casual typist, arbitrarily and in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, and denYing reinstatement with full back wage is legal and justified? If not to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to - The Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad, vide its Award passed on 18.12.1996 (read with corrigendum dated 18.2.1997) answered the Reference in favour of the concerned workman and directed the Management of the Food Corporation of India to reinstate and regularize the workman from the date of retrenchment with 50% back wages, within two months from the date of publication of the award. Against the Award of the Tribunal, the Management of the Food Corporation of India filed CWJC No. 5857 to' 1997.
(3.) THE dispute in reference case no. 108 of 1992 (CWJC No. 4497 of 1997) was raised by the respondent workman Sri Hari Nandan Prasad. His claim was that he was working in the Food Corporation of India as Food Storage Depot In -charge from 1.6.1980 to 26.3.1983 and had worked for more than 240 days in 12 calendar months. However, he was stopped from work from 1.3.1983 without notice and was retrenched from service without any prior notice or payment of retrenchment compensation in violation of the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Management of the Food Corporation of India contested the claim of the workman by counter asserting that the concerned workman was engaged as a temporary casual workman on 1.6.1980 by the then Junior Engineer, Sri S.N. Kumar, posted at the Food Storage Godown while construction work was In progress. The Junior Engineer was not the competent authority to engage any casual worker since it is only the District Manager who was competent to employ a casual worker. It was also contested that since casual workers were employed on ad hoc basis, the workman could be appointed only by following regular procedures through Employment Exchange and only when a permanent vacancy exists.;