THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.614 of 2004 ORDER: The petitioner approached the Labour Court, Warangal by I.D.No.116 of 1999 alleging that the respondents have orally terminate from service in contravention of Section 25 of the Industrial Disputes 1947. He pleaded that he was engaged as NMR for a period of ten between 1983 and 1993 and his services were terminated orally, w following the procedure prescribed under law. The respondents fi counter denying the allegations. According to them, the petitioner wa engaged as NMR at any point of time. The Labour Court dismissed the through the award, dated 22.08.2003. The same is challenged in thi petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the lea Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings for the respondents. It is not necessary that a person must have been remove retrenched from service through a written order. Retrenchment even th oral orders, can be taken into account, in case an industrial dispu raised. However, an important fact, which needs to be proved, is tha person who raises the industrial dispute must have been engaged workman. Here again, law does not necessitate that the appointment s be through a written order. If there exists any adequate mater substantiate that there was engagement of services and wages are necessary relief can be granted. In the instant case, except the oral statement of the petitioner th is engaged, he did not place any material to establish the same. Ther the Labour Court virtually handicap in granting any relief in the absen any evidence. No exception can be taken to the award under challenge The writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost ________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDD Date:30.09.2010 VGB