IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 8654 of 2009. Date of Decision : May 29, 2009. Harmesh Singh son of Shri Amarjit Singh, resident of Village Ghutind, P.O. Salana, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. ...... Petitioner. Versus. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ludhiana, and another. ..... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the award dated 05.02.2008 (Annexure-P-3), passed by the Labour Court, Ludhiana, vide which the reference has been answered against the workman on the ground that the workman has not been able to prove that he had worked continuously for 240 days with the Management in the 12 preceding months from his alleged date of termination. Counsel for the petitioner contends that although the workman has not been able to prove that he had worked for more than 240 days in the 12 preceding months from the date of his termination but since Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) has not been complied with by the Management, therefore, the termination of the workman is not in accordance with law as the same is violative of provisions C.W.P. No. 8654 of 2009. of the Industrial Disputes Act. On a question being put by the Court as to which person has been appointed in the similar capacity as the workman was working with the Management after his termination, counsel is unable to show anything from the records to that effect. This assertion of counsel for the petitioner is, therefore, baseless and cannot be made a ground to interfere with the well reasoned and justified order dated 05.02.2008 (Annexure-P-3), passed by the Labour Court, Ludhiana, impugned herein. Finding no illegality in the impugned award, the present writ petition stands dismissed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE May 29, 2009. sjks. Whether referred to the Reporter - Yes / No. -2-