( 1 ) THE petitioner challenges the award of the Labour court dated 12. 12. 2000 by which the Labour Court has observed that the petitioner is an industry as defined under Section 2 (j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court has also held that the respondent No. 1 is a workman as defined under Section 2 (s) of the industrial Disputes Act. As these two issues were decided as preliminary issues, there is no finding recorded by the Labour Court on merits.

( 2 ) THE petitioner claims to be an educational institute for mentally challenged children. It is funded by various business houses. According to the petitioner, its main object is to impart education to the mentally challenged and to rehabilitate them in order to enable them to lead independent lives as an integral part of society. The petitioner employed the respondent No. 1 as a "teacher" from 4. 8. 1992 on a temporary basis. After the temporary period was over on 3. 2. 1993, the petitioner appointed the 1st respondent again for a period of two months i. e. upto 30. 4. 1993 on a temporary basis. According to the petitioner, the services of the 1st respondent were not found to be satisfactory and, therefore, memos,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document