2003lpa98.12 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR L. P. A. NO. 98 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 904 OF 2011 Dy. Conservator of Forest & Ors. Vs. Mohan Raghuvir Chavan ........................................................................................................................................................................ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................................................ Shri N. S. Khubalkar AGP for appellant. Shri B. M. Khan Adv for respondent. CORAM: B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & A.B.CHAUDHARI JJ. DATED: 20th MARCH, 2012. Contention by learned AGP is that respondent has not proved continuous service of 240 days in preceding five years prior to 1st November 1994 and, therefore, policy decision dated 31st January 1996 is not applicable to him. Shri Khan learned counsel for the respondent points out that documents maintained by the department at Ex. 34 and 35 have been proved before the Industrial Court and they show that department has included the name of respondent in list of employees who have put in five years continuous service as on 1st November 1994. 2003lpa98.12 2 It is not in dispute that list at Ex. 34 or 35 is list of those employees who have put in five years continuous service on 1st November 1994. Obviously it is for the purpose of implementation of Government Resolution dated 31st January 1996 and Industrial Court has correctly viewed it. As name of respondent has been placed in that list by appellant, it is apparent that contention about not showing completion of 240 days in each year is misconceived. Industrial Court as also learned Single Judge has correctly appreciated the controversy. Letters Patent Appeal is thus rejected. JUDGE JUDGE svk