MUKUL MUDGAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS Letters Patent Appeal challenges the order dated 19. 10. 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge upholding the Award dated 30th April 2004 of the central Government Industrial Tribunal (`tribunal') holding that the termination of the services of the respondent was illegal as it was done without complying with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('i. D. Act' ). The tribunal had recorded the following findings:"from the evidence on record, I find that the workman worked continuously w. ef. 20. 8. 1990 to 16. 9. 1993 in the direct control of Dy. Director (Horticulture and other concerned officers of the Department of CPWD which go to more than 240 days in every year and admittedly prior to termination of his services, no notice, or notice pay and payments of compensation was given to him. It clearly goes to show that the services were terminated in clear violation of Section 25-F of the I. D. Act. Therefore, the action of the management in terminating the service of the workman Shri Satya Pal cannot be justified. It was improper and illegal and deserves to be quashed and the workman deserves to be reinstated in the service in the same capacit