JUDGMENT (Per Swatanter Kumar, C.J.):

1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order of the learned single Judge dated 13th August, 2007, passed in Writ Petition No. 7300 of 2003, whereby the learned single Judge, while dismissing the petition, has observed that the decision of the Labour Court need not be interfered with under writ jurisdiction as there is no perversity in the conclusions drawn by the Labour Court. The Labour Court has held the appellant not to be a workman.

2. The necessary facts are that according to the appellant he was appointed as Quality Assurance In-charge vide letter of appointment dated 25th April, 1994 , in furtherance to which the appellant joined the post in the pay scale of Rs. 1850-170-2700-200-3700-250-4950. According to the appellant, he was working in the Quality Control Department and was doing inspecting job and related technical and clerical work. However, the services of the appellant were terminated by the management vide its letter dated 8th September, 1995. This action of the respondent-management was challenged by the appellant who claimed to be a ‘ workman’ within the meaning of Section 2 (s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinaf

Click Here to Read the rest of this document