IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1013 of 2010 IN CWJC 520/2003 WITH I.A. NO. 5550 of 2010 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1013 of 2010 ========================================== 1. RAMESH PRASAD SINGH, S/O LATE JAMUNA PRASAD SINGH, R/O VILLAGE LARAULI, P.O. BISHUNPURA BAZAR,P.S. SIDHWALIA,DISTRICT- GOPALGANJ. Versus 1. THE PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT,CHAPRA. 2. M/S BHARAT SUGAR MILL LIMITED AT & P.O. SIDHWALIA, DISTRICT-GOPALGANJ, THROUGH ITS SENIOR EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT BISHNU KUMAR SUREKA. ========================================== Appearance: For the Appellant: Mr. KUMAR VEERENDRA NARAYAN Mr. SHIVAJEE PANDEY, Sr. Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. K.N. GUPTA Mr. SATYENDRA KRISHNA PRASAD ========================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 05. 30.09.2010 Reg: I.A. No. 5550 of 2010 This Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed by the appellant-Workman for condonation of delay of nine days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the delay is condoned. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. 2 Reg: L.P.A. No. 1031 of 2010 This Appeal is preferred by the Workman under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the judgment and order dated 29th March 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 520 of 2003. The Workman was a seasonal employee of the respondent M/s Bharat Sugar Mills Limited. He served as Weighing Clerk during the crushing season from the year 1980 to 1988. The Workman raised industrial dispute in respect of dis-continuance of his service which culminated into I.D. Reference No. 11 of 1992 before the Labour Court, Chapra. The learned Labour Court by his judgment and award dated 5th September 2002, held that the service of the Workman was terminated without following the procedure envisaged by Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The learned Labour Court, therefore, directed that the Workman be reinstated in service and be paid 50 per cent of the back wages. The said order was challenged by the respondent before the learned Single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 520 of 2003. The learned Single Judge, by impugned judgment and order dated 29th March 2010, held that the Workman was a seasonal worker and that he had not completed 240 days’ service during a period of 12 calendar months. It was further held that the workman was employed in a foreign country, Saudi Arabia. In view of the aforesaid finding the learned Single 3 Judge allowed the writ petition and set aside the judgment and award passed by the Labour Court. Feeling aggrieved the workman has preferred the present Appeal. We have heard the learned counsel. No case for interference is made out. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. S.Sb/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ.) (Jyoti Saran, J.)