IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 4789 of 2008 Decided on: 11.08.2010 _______________________________________________________________________ Kamal Raj …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 and Mr. R.P.Singh, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents. _______________________________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : The case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that he had completed 240 days preceding his retrenchment on 31.07.1994. He has been retrenched without complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 2. However, Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General has drawn attention of the Court to the mandays' chart, i.e. Annexure R-A. A bare perusal of the mandays' chart reveals that the petitioner had worked for 57 ½ days in 1993. Since, the petitioner has not completed 240 days in a block of 12 calender months, there is no merit in this 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No -2- petition and the same is dismissed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge August 11, 2010 (K. Attri)