IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.12561 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 17.03.2010 Piara ....Petitioner(s) vs. P.O.L.C. and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.Deepak Sonak, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Addl.A.G., Haryana, for respondents No.2 and 3. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) Prayer in the present writ petition is for setting aside of the Award dated 8.10.2008 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Labour Court, Ambala vide which the reference has been answered against the workman holding therein that he had failed to prove that he has completed 240 days in the 12 preceding months from the date of his termination. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the workman had appeared before the Labour Court and stated categorically that he had been working with the respondents from the year 1989 till 19.6.2004 when his services were terminated without any notice or pay in lieu thereof or any compensation as required under the Act. He contends that the documents so produced before the Labour Court would show that the workman had completed more than 240 days in the 12 preceding months and, therefore, the termination of the workman was not in consonance with law, entitling the workman to reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits. He, on this basis, prays that the present writ petition be allowed. C.W.P.No.12561 of 2009 -2- On the other hand, counsel for the respondents contends that the complete relevant records were produced by the Management before the Labour Court. Not only the muster rolls but the payment receipts were also produced from April 1990 till June 2004. Those documents were exhibited as W-8 to W-57. That apart, the working details were also produced before the Labour Court which were in accordance with the records which were produced. On consideration of the complete evidence which was produced by the Management, the Labour Court has come to a conclusive finding that the workman had not completed more than 240 days in the 12 preceding months from the date of his termination. The categoric stand of the Management was that the workman had not completed more than 240 days in service. He, on this basis, contends that the finding recorded by the Labour Court that the workman had not been able to prove that he had worked for more than 240 days in service in the 12 preceding months from the date of his alleged termination i.e. 19.6.2004 is fully justified which does not call for any interference by this Court. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. The Labour Court in its impugned Award has taken into consideration the evidence led by the parties. The statement of the workman is bald one which has not been substantiated on the basis of the record. The documentary evidence has been produced by the Management in support of their contention that in none of the years i.e. from 1990 to June 2004, the workman had completed more than 240 days. It was the categoric stand of the Management that in the 12 preceding months from the C.W.P.No.12561 of 2009 -3- date of his termination the workman had not worked for 240 days. In support of this contention, the Management had produced the complete muster rolls and payment receipts. On consideration of the documents so placed on record, the Labour Court has returned a finding that the workman has not been able to prove that he had put in service of 240 days under the respondent-Management in the 12 preceding months from the date of his termination. The onus that was placed upon the workman has not been discharged by him. The findings as recorded by the Labour Court are fully justified. The impugned Award passed by the Labour Court is in accordance with law and no illegality or irregularity has been committed which would call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. Dismissed. March 17, 2010 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE