Civil Writ Petition No. 14496 of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No. 14496 of 2008 Date of Decision: 4.9.2008 Kewal Krishan …Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur and Another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr.Paramjit Singh Goraya, Advocate for the petitioners. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. Present petition has been filed by Kewal Krishan, petitioner- workman, against Simma Industries, Defence Road, Madhopur, respondent No.2 (hereinafter called as “the Management”) challenging the Award (Annexure P1) passed by learned Labour Court, Gurdaspur on 9.4.2007. It has been pleaded by petitioner-workman that he was employed as Driver on 1.8.1997 at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month and his services were terminated on 1.4.1998 due to trade union activities. Civil Writ Petition No. 14496 of 2008 2 The petitioner-workman had served a demand notice on 24.9.1998 and after the reference was made, submitted his statement of claim on 15.3.2001. Respondent No.2-Management filed a written statement and took a preliminary objection that the workman has not completed 240 days of continuous service in 12 preceding calendar months. It has been further averred that on 1.4.1998, the truck driven by petitioner-workman had met with an accident, which has resulted into total loss of the vehicle. Mr. Vikram Kohli, MW.1, a witness produced by the Management, stated that the petitioner-workman had worked from 27.1.1998 to 1.4.1998. It has been further stated that after the accident, the petitioner-workman absconded from the hospital. Learned Labour Court returning the following finding of fact:- “...No doubt, the workman Kewal Krishan in his examination-in-chief, has stated that he worked continuously from 1.8.1997 to 1.4.1998, but during his cross-examination, he frankly has conceded that he has no proof with regards to his employment with the respondent. He has failed to prove on file any appointment of termination order. He has also failed to prove on file any salary slip or any other record with regard to his employment. Even when, attendance register from 4/93 to 3/99 was brought by Shri Vikram Kohli, MW-1, the workman has failed to prove from the said record that he in fact worked Civil Writ Petition No. 14496 of 2008 3 for the continuous period of 240 days in the preceding 12 calendar month. So, in these circumstances, this Court is of the view that the workman has failed to prove on the record that he in fact worked for the continuous period of 240 days in the preceding 12 Calendar months”. Having held that the petitioner-workman had not served the Management for 240 days in the preceding 12 Calendar months. Learned Labour Court awarded a compensation for Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner-workman. We find no infirmity in the Award of the learned Labour Court, which is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge (Hemant Gupta) Judge September 4, 2008 “DK”