Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Mehboob S/o Yusuf Sheikh, was an employee under the Employment Guarantee Scheme on the establishment of the respondents, the Executive Engineer and Sub-Divisional Officer. He claimed to have worked continuously from 01/01/1988 to 13/07/1995 without any break. The Labour Court and Industrial Court accepted his case. However, the respondents challenged the award before a Single Judge of the Bombay High Court, raising two questions: (1) whether the respondents' establishment was an 'industry', and (2) whether the employee had completed 240 days of continuous service immediately preceding termination. The Single Judge left the first question unanswered and found that the employee had completed only 230 days in the year preceding termination, thus no violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. In this Letters Patent Appeal, the Division Bench noted that the Single Judge did not examine whether the employee had completed 240 days in the earlier years of service (from 01/01/1988 to 12/07/1994). Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in M/s. U.P. Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd. v. Ramanuj Yadav (AIR 2003 SC 3337) and the Division Bench's decision in Jairaj N. Shetty v. Union of India (2006 ILLJ 206), the court held that completion of 240 days in earlier years is relevant under Section 25B(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Single Judge for fresh consideration on the issue of continuous service.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Continuous Service - Section 25B of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The court held that the completion of 240 days of continuous service in earlier years is also relevant under Section 25B(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Single Judge failed to examine this aspect. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Single Judge erred in not considering whether the appellant-employee had completed 240 days of continuous service in the years prior to the year preceding termination, as required under Section 25B(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned judgment of Single Judge set aside. Matter remanded to Single Judge for fresh consideration on the issue of continuous service under Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Law Points
- Continuous service under Section 25B of Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947 includes completion of 240 days in earlier years
- not just the year preceding termination
- Relevancy of Section 25B(2) for determining continuous service
