S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 3928/2008 Deputy Conservator of Forest, Alwar vs Labour Court Alwar and another 06.05.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PREM SHANKAR ASOPA Mr. M.F. Beg, for the petitioner. Mr. Raj Kumar Sharma, for the respondents. Although the case has come up for consideration on the application under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act of 1947'). Both the parties appeared and the consent of the parties, the writ petition is heard finally. By this writ petition, the Official of the State has challenged the awarded of the Labour court dated 29.5.2007 whereby retrenchment of the respondent workman from 1.3.1986(although referred in dispute as 1.4.1988) has been declared invalid and the respondent workman was reinstated with 25% back-wages with effect from 1.3.1990 with continuity of service. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent-workman has not completed 240 days in the last preceding from the date of retrenchment i.e. 1.4.1988, therefore, section 25-F of the Act of 1947 would not apply and further there was no material on record to infer that provisions of sections 25-G and H have been violated. Counsel for the respondent workman submits that the Labour court after discussion of the evidence at internal page 2 to 3 came to the conclusion that the petitioner has completed 209 working days in the last preceding one year and after inclusion of holidays, the working days then would be more than 240 days. Admittedly, the provisions of section 25- F has not been complied with. He also submits that after termination of the services of the respondent workman, from 1.4.1986 to 1.7.1988, the services of Jagdeesh Gujar and Murari Lal were retained. Therefore, the lalbour court has rightly concluded that the provisions of section 25-G and H have also not been complied with. I have gone through the record of the writ petition and considered the rival submissions made at the bar. The Labour court has not committed any kind of error in calculating 240 days in the last preceding year and further the violation of Section 25-F,25- G and 25-H of the Act of 1947 on account of continuation and fresh appointment of aforesaid persons. In view of the above, the award of the Labour Court does not call for any interference. The writ petition has no force and the same is dismissed. In view of the above, the application under Section 17-B of Industrial disputes Act, 1947 also stands disposed of accordingly. (Prem Shankar Asopa),J om