IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.1497 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: 30.1.2009 Savitri Devi ...Petitioner VERSUS Secy. to Govt. of Punjab …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.S.P.Garg, Advocate for petitioner Mr.BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. On the asking of this Court, Mr.Chahal who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. It is agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties that the issue involved in the present petition is squarely covered by the judgment dated 22.5.2008 passed by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Gobind vs. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jalandhar and another, CWP No.4660 of 1999 wherein following observations have been made:- “....In view of the facts mentioned above, we conclude that a part time worker would fall within the definition of a workman as postulated under Section 2 (s) of the I.D. Act. However, nature of his employment will be that of a contractual employee CWP No.1497 of 2009 :2: and employer be at liberty to terminate him and his termination would not entitle him to get any benefit under the provisions of Chapter VA and VB of the I.D. Act. It is further clarified that to enforce rights and obligations arising under contract of employment, may be in writing or oral, the part time worker may invoke the provisions of I.D. Act other than contained in Chapter VA and VB of the Act. Question posed is answered in above mentioned manner. This writ petition stands dismissed.” This petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 30.1.2009 MFK