1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.6700 OF 2007. Ganpat S/o Baburao Narwade ... Petitioner. Versus Deputy Engineer, Sub-Division, Zilla Parishad, Nanded and others ... Respondents. ... Mr.Pradeep Shahane, advocate for the petitioner. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 served. ... CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J. Date : 26.06.2009. PER COURT 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner was working as Muster Assistant with effect from 6.6.1983. He was appointed under the Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS). He was being paid consolidated salary of 2 Rs.300/- (Rupees three hundred ) p.m. His case before the Labour Court was that he had completed 240 days of continuous work before illegal termination. He asserted that by adopting unfair labour practice, his services were terminated with effect from 20.5.1987. He, therefore, sought reinstatement in the service alongwith the back wages and continuity of service by fling complaint (ULP) No.73/1995. The learned Member of the Labour Court held that the petitioner could not claim right to continue in the service because his employment itself was of contingent in nature under EGS scheme. The complaint (ULP) No.73/1995 came to be dismissed. The Revisional Court upheld the same decision. The learned Member of the Industrial Court by his order dated 11.4.2007, in Revision Application (ULP) No. 8/2007, rendered concurrent findings. 3. There can not be duality of opinion that EGS is a special scheme drawn with objective providing work under certain circumstances like famine and drought etc. The EGS can not be treated as a particular Department nor posts were 3 advertised nor there was any appointment under specific Rules as such. Considering these aspects, the concurrent findings of both the Courts can not be disturbed in the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction. No perversity is noticed. Dismissed. (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) asp/office/wp670007