1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. L.P.A. NO.285 OF 2009. IN W.P. NO.2205 OF 2008 (D). SHRIKRUSHNA S/O LAXMANRAO BARASKAR VS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.W.D., ACHALPUR AND ANOTHER Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri N. R. Saboo, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Y. B. Mandpe, AGP for State/respondents. Coram : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND F.M. REIS, JJ. Dated : 12TH OCTOBER, 2009. Heard Advocate Shri Saboo for the appellant and Shri YB Mandpe, learned AGP for the Respondents. The Labour Court in reference proceedings found that as the appellant had completed 240 days of continuous service, he was entitled to reinstatement. As the dispute was raised after about 15 years, back wages were denied. His Employer State Government approached this Court and the learned Single Judge found that the finding of completion of 240 days was misconceived. Thereafter, the proceeding L.P. A. has been filed. Advocate Shri Saboo has contended that completion of 240 days of continuous service is a 2 finding of fact, and there is no discussion by the learned Single Judge to demonstrate as to how it is perverse. In the alternative, he argues that the continuation of juniors in service was pleaded and their names were disclosed by the appellant. He further states that after termination of the appellant, employment was provided to others and violation of Section 25-G & H was also demonstrated. Both these aspects were not looked into by the reference Court as also the Single Judge. He argues that completion of 240 days of continuous service is not relevant for section 25-G or 25-H. Learned AGP states that still learned Single Judge has looked into the evidence on record and thereafter, has found that completion of 240 days continuous service has not been established. He states that the burden is on the appellant. He points out that the reference was made after about 15 years and the appellant had put in only 3 years of service even as per his case that too on daily wages and therefore, he had no right to post. We have perused the record and we find that according to the appellant, he worked from March 1982 to 21-12-1985 on daily wages. His contention that he rendered 240 days of continuous service was accepted 3 by the reference Court, but then learned Single Judge has appreciated the evidence and in the light of the judgments relied upon before it, has concluded that such service has not been established. The burden to prove completion of 240 days of continuous service was upon the appellant. Though we find that he approached the reference Court with a grievance that the juniors were retained or then fresh employees were recruited, in the present facts, after noticing the status of the appellant as a daily wager and small period of his service from March 1982 to 21-12-1985 and the fact that the dispute was raised by the appellant after 15 years, we are not inclined to interfere in the mater in the Letters Patent Appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE /Muley/