IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 1053 of 2009. Date of Decision : January 22, 2009. Birender. ...... Petitioner. Versus. The Presiding Officer and others. ...... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present: Mr. I.D. Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). Through this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 15.07.2008 (Annexure-P-1), passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Hisar, vide which the claim of the workman has been rejected while answering the reference against him. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Labour Court had proceeded on wrong assumptions that the appointment of workman was under the provisions of Section 2 (oo) (bb) and Sections 25-F, 25-G, 25-H, have not been taken into consideration while rejecting his claim. On a question being put by the Court as to whether the workman has completed 240 days in service because unless the said period preceding 12 months from the date of his termination is established, the workman would have no right which would flow from the Industrial Disputes Act especially with regard to Section 25-F of the Act and other provisions thereon. C.W.P. No. 1053 of 2009. Counsel for the petitioner is unable to substantiate this assertion that the workman has completed more than 240 days in the preceding 12 months from the date of his termination. That being so, I do not find any merit in this writ petitioner and dismiss the same. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE January 22, 2009. sjks. -2-