IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No. 10766 of 2009 Date of decision July 22 2009 Darshan Lal ....... Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jalandhar and others . .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. **** 1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? No K. Kannan, J (oral). The petition challenges the award dismissing the claim of the workman for reinstatement. The Labour Court found that there had been no proof of the engagement of the workman who was admittedly a casual worker for a period of 240 days. The workman is unable to produce material before this Court still to take a different view from how the Labour Court had arrived at a factual rendering that the workman has not completed 240 days. The finding that there was no violation of any provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before terminating his services cannot be doubted. There is no scope for intervention in writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE July 22, 2009 archana