IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.20333 of 2010 Ram Rattan Sharma Vs. M/s R.C.Sood & Co.(P) Ltd., Faridabad & another Present: Mr.Karamjit Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant/Supervisor Horticulture. He had sought reference of his dispute regarding his termination. The Labour Court while deciding the reference has found that the petitioner was working in supervisory capacity and accordingly has held that he is not a workman. The reference accordingly has been declined. Counsel for the petitioner says that petitioner had no supervisory role to perform and his job was purely manual and he could not have been termed as a supervisor to say that he is not covered within the definition of a workman. The court has considered this aspect and has returned a factual finding against the petitioner. While taking this view, the Labour Court has referred to large number of judgments as noticed in the impugned order. Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to say anything to dispute the finding as returned by the Court. No case for interference, thus, is made out. Dismissed. November 16, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE