IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 14960 of 2009 Date of decision: 15.09.2010 Bansi Lal ...Petitioner Versus The Labour Court, Gurdaspur and others ...Respondents Present: Mr. Sarabjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Charath, Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3. ***** RANJIT SINGH J. The petitioner/workman had challenged the Award dated 20.04.2009 whereby reference in dispute has been declined. The petitioner/workman had sought reference related to his termination which as per him is innocuously worded yet it in fact was by way of punishment. The petitioner/workman claims to have been appointed on November, 1988 but was terminated on 01.02.1991. The petitioner sought reference of the dispute only in January, 2004 when the dispute was referred. The same dispute has now been decided against the petitioner on 20.04.2009. The finding of fact recorded by the Labour Court is that the petitioner could succeed in showing that he had only worked for 165 days in 12 preceding months from the date of his termination. It is observed that the burden of proof that the petitioner had worked for 240 days in the calender year preceding the date of termination was on the petitioner. Except for his statement that he had worked for 240 Civil Writ Petition No. 14960 of 2009 -2- days, he could not show anything and accordingly the workman had held discharged in this regard. It has also been found that the petitioner had sought reference after expiry of 12 years and this has been another reason for declining the relief to the petitioner. Nothing substantial has come out from the proceedings, which would call for interference . The present writ petition is, accordingly dismissed. September 15, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE