IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 12781 of 2008. Date of Decision : February 12 , 2009. Shree Bhagwan. .... Petitioner. Versus. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, ...Respondents. Hisar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present: Mr. Anurag Bharadwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate, for the respondents No. 2 and 3. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). I have gone through the records of the case and award passed by the Labour Court and perusal thereof would show that no finding on the issue with regard to the period of work which has been put in by the workman and with specific reference to 12 months prior to termination has been given on the basis of the evidence which has been led. The court has proceeded on the assumption that since the workman has worked as daily wager he is not entitled to reinstatement in view of the latest judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and Division Bench of this Court even if the services of the workman is terminated in violation of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act and if Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India have not been complied with at the time of initial appointment. However, the Labour Court has totally overlooked the latest judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Telecom District Manager and C.W.P. No. 12781 of 2008. others Versus Kesheb Deb, 2008 (4) S.C.T. 33, and the Division Bench of this Court in State of Haryana Versus Ishwar Singh and another, 2008 (3) S.C.T. 788, which has held that still in lieu of reinstatement, the workman would be entitled to compensation. Therefore, a finding to this effect whether the workman has completed 240 days in 12 preceding calendar months from the date of his termination has to be recorded by the Court so that it could be ascertained as to whether provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act needs to be complied with. No evidence to this effect nor any finding to this effect has been given by the Labour Court. Apart from this, the Labour Court is the first Court and therefore, it is mandated that the findings on the issue should be specifically given on the question of facts on the basis of the pleadings and evidence. The primary requirement of the first court which hold the original jurisdiction is to give a finding on the facts and then apply law to those findings. That having not been done, the award dated 04.03.2008 (Annexure-P-4) which is impugned herein, passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar, cannot be sustained. The present writ petition is allowed, award dated 04.03.2008 (Annexure-P-4), passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar, is hereby set aside. The Labour Court is directed to decide the reference as per observations made above in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the Labour Court on 26.02.2009. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE February 12, 2009. sjks. -2-