( 1 ) IN these appeals, a short but an important point namely, "whether the period of limitation provided under Section 10 (4-A) of the Act, is directory or mandatory?" arises for consideration.

( 2 ) FACTS, which give rise to present appeals are: the respondents, claiming as workmen under the appellant 2 filed applications under Section 10 (4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'act'), before the Labour Court, stating that though they were working under the second appellant from 18-2-1993, March 1992, 14-7-1992, 22-1-1992, 1-6-1991 and 1-6-1991, without any reason, notice or enquiry, they were refused employment from 1-6-1994, 24-12-1993, 1-5-1993, 1-3- 1993, 12-12-1993 and 1-3-1993 respectively in violation of the principles of natural justice, Government Order and Section 25-F of the Act and hence, entitled to the reliefs claimed therein. The appellants opposed the same stating that they (applicants) were appointed as daily wagers for a particular scheme of work and after completion of that scheme, as their services were not required, they were not called for work and hence, no direction can be given to appoint by creating posts, and they (applicants) h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document