IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 1737 of 2009 and C.W.P. No. 7537 of 1997. Date of Decision : February 12 , 2009. Balkar Singh. .... Petitioner. Versus. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala and others. ...Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present: Mr. Namit Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. D.S. Nalwa, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondents No. 2 and 3. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). C.M. No. 1737 of 2009. Application under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 C.P.C. for impleading the legal representatives of the petitioner as given in para-3 of the application, is allowed. The Registry is directed to make necessary changes in the Memo of Parties. C.W.P.No. 7537 of 1997. In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the award dated 16.03.1995 (Annexure-P-11), passed by the Labour Court, Ambala, wherein the reference was made against the workman. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the workman had worked with the respondents as helper electrician from 01.10.1987 to 01.03.1989, and thereafter his services were illegally terminated without C.W.P. No. 7537 of 1997. complying with the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. He further contends that 240 days have been completed by the workman during the 12 preceding calendar months. He contends that the finding recorded by the Labour Court, cannot be sustained in view of the fact that the Court has proceeded with the assumption that the appointment of the workman was for a specific period which was extended from time to time. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Haryana Versus Ishwar Singh and another, 2008 (3) S.C.T. 788, has held that even if the service of the workman is covered by the provisions of Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act but if the workman has worked for more than 240 days, he would not entitled for reinstatement but would be entitled to compensation. Following the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Haryana Versus Ishwar Singh and another (supra), which is fully applicable to the facts of the present case, the petitioner is entitled to compensation of Rs. 20,000/- as provisions of Sections 25-F and 25-G were not complied with at the time when the service of the petitioner was terminated. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands disposed of. The respondents are directed to make the payment of compensation i.e. Rs. 20,000/- to the legal representatives of the petitioner within a period of two months. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE February 12, 2009. -2- C.W.P. No. 7537 of 1997. sjks. -3-