C.W.P. No.14954 of 2000 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.14954 of 2000 Date of Decision:07.09.2009 Haryana Seeds Development Corporation .....Petitioner Versus Subhash Chander and another ...Respondents Present: Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.P. Bhatt, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The cause title is ordered to be corrected suo motu as Haryana Seeds Development Corporation which is wrongly mentioned in the cause title as Haryana State Development Corporation. The award under challenge is a direction for reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. Admittedly, the workman had been appointed as a Helper on 12.04.1993 and he was terminated from service on 05.06.1997. The defence by the Corporation was that the workman had not been completed 240 days of continuous service in the calendar year prior to the year of termination. The attendance register had been filed before the Labour Court (Annexure P-3 before this Court), which showed that the workman had worked for more than 240 days, 265 days be precise for 12 months prior to his date of termination. The Labour Court rejected the contention, by a proper reading of C.W.P. No.14954 of 2000 -2- Section 25-B of the Industrial Disputes Act that the relevance under the enactment was 12 calendar months and not the calendar year prior to the date of termination. On the finding that he had completed 240 days prior to the date of termination, the Court found that there had been a non-compliance of Section 25-F and found the termination to be bad. 2. On a consideration of the aspect whether the workman could be entitled to reinstatement, the Court found that although certain activities of the respondent-Corporation had been declared as seasonal, the industry itself was not seasonal in character. With reference to the Government letter which was exhibited as Ex.M-1, the Labour Court found that the works of processing, packing and certification of raw seeds of Rabi and Kharif Crops alone were declared seasonal in character. The workman was not shown to have been engaged in any one of the seasonal works and therefore, directed that the workman was entitled to reinstatement. On the issue regarding whether the workman would be entitled to back wages, the Labour Court held that he had remained under forced idleness and he had not been guilty of any delay in raising the industrial dispute. The demand had been raised the following month and the reference came soon thereafter. The Labour Court has considered all the relevant factors and has passed the award under challenge now. 3. There is no ground for interference with the findings and the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be however no direction as to costs. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 07, 2009 Pankaj*