IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 6654 of 2008 Decided on: 06.09.2010 Jai Singh Deshta …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1. No For the petitioner. : None. For the respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General, for the respondents. _______________________________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : The case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that he has been dis-engaged by the respondent-State on 1.10.1999. His further case is that since he had completed requisite number of days in each calender year, he was entitled to benefit of counting this period for the purpose of monetary benefits or for compensation in lieu thereof. 2. However, it has come in the reply filed by the respondent-State that the petitioner has worked only for 137 days in the year 1998 and 152 days in the year 1999 as per Annexure R-1. Since the petitioner has not worked for 240 days' in a block of 12 calender years preceding his dis-engagement, he is not entitled to the monetary benefits as per provisions of Section 25-F 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No -2- of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 3. In view of the observations made hereinabove, the petition is dismissed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge September 6, 2010 (K. Attri)