CWP No. 11667 of 1993 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 11667 of 1993 Date of decision: 27.05.2010 Maha Ram son of Sh. Hirdey Narain ...... PETITIONER VERSUS Central Soil Saliniti Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana and another ....... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Sachin Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Raj Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present writ petition is for setting aside of the Award dated 15.12.1992 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh, vide which the reference has been answered against the workman on the ground that the workman has failed to prove before the Labour Court that he had completed more than 240 days in service in 12 preceding months from the date of his termination from service. CWP No. 11667 of 1993 2 Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was appointed as Mali through Employment Exchange on 21.11.1983 with respondent No. 1-Management and worked up to August, 1986 when his services were terminated. He contends that the termination of the services of the petitioner was in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act as no notice, pay in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation was paid to the petitioner. He contends that the records of the daily wagers were with the Management which they failed to produce before the Labour Court and, therefore, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected. His further contention is that since the Management was required to produce the records and it did not produce the Muster Rolls, the findings recorded by the Labour Court cannot be sustained and deserve to be set aside. He, on this basis, contends that the impugned Award be set aside and the petitioner be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits. On the other hand, counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that the working details i.e. the period for which the workman had worked with the Management, were submitted by the Management before the Labour Court. The said working details were prepared on the basis of the records available at that time. The authenticity of the said details was not disputed. The onus to prove that the workman had completed more than 240 days in service in 12 preceding months from the date of his termination, was on the workman himself and for that purpose, if he wanted to prove to the contrary, the workman should have summoned the records of the Management for the relevant period which the workman failed to do and, therefore, the Labour Court has, on the basis of the documentary evidence produced by the Management, proceeded to decide that the workman had not completed more than 240 days in service in 12 preceding months from CWP No. 11667 of 1993 3 the date of his termination. He, therefore, supports the Award passed by the Central Government, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh. I have heard the counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. It is now well settled preposition of law that the onus to prove that the workman had completed more than 240 days in service in 12 preceding months from the date of his termination, is on the workman himself. It is true that the records are maintained by the Management and they are duty bound to produce the same in case they are summoned. In the present case, the workman failed to summon the records from the Management, therefore, non-production of the said records cannot be said to be illegal on the part of the Management, of which no benefit can be derived by the petitioner-workman. In any case, the details for the days for which the workman had put in service with the Management were produced before the Labour Court by the Management Witness, who had stated that the same have been prepared on the basis of the records which had been accepted by the Labour Court and had rightly given a finding that the workman had not completed more than 240 days in service in 12 preceding months from the date of his termination. The finding, as recorded by the Labour Court, is in accordance with law and based on the evidence, which has been led by the parties before it. Finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same stands dismissed. ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE May 27, 2010 pj