( 1 ) LEARNED advocate Mr. Thakkar is appearing for the petitioner Co. Nobody has appeared for the respondent workman, though served. This Court, while admitting this petition on 28/04/1989, has granted the interim relief subject to the provisions of section 17b of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ("the ID Act" for short ).

( 2 ) NOTHING rankles more in the human heart than a brooding sense of injustice when only the rich enjoy the law as a luxury and the poor who need it most, cannot have it because its expenses put it beyond their reach. Threat to the existence of free democracy is not imaginary but real because democracys very life depends upon making the machinery of justice so effective that every citizen shall believe in and benefit by its impartiality and fairness.

( 3 ) IT was the boast of the Augusts that he found Rome of Bricks and left it of marble. But how much nobler will be our boast, when we shall have to say that we found law dear and left it cheap, found it a sealed book and left it a living letter.

( 4 ) JUSTICE without power is toothless. Power without justice is ruthless. Justice and power must, therefore, be brought together so that whatever is just may be powerful and whatever is powerful may be just.

( 5 ) IN the present case, the question has been raised for consideration that whether for getting benefit under section 25f of the ID Act, it is required to have completed 240 days of continuous service by the workman within the period of one year and whether it is not necessary in light of the provisions of section 25b sub clause (1) of the ID Act.

( 6 ) THE facts of the present case, in short, are that in all, eight workmen were working with the petitioner Co. since more than 12 years on daily wages with the petitioner Co. and their services were terminated with effect from 1/01/1983 without issuing any show cause notice or retrenchment compensation and without giving any opportunity of hearing to the respondent workmen and, therefore, the respondent workmen issued notice to the petitioner on 14. 1. 1983 and the petitioner Co. had not given any reply to it and ultimately the complaint was filed by the workmen on 1/08/1983 before the Government Labour Officer, Rajkot and, thereafter, said dispute was referred by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Rajkot to the Labour Court, Rajkot vide order dated 9/01/1984 being reference No. 285 of 1984 to 292 of 1984. According to the terms of reference, the demand was to reinstate the workmen with full back wages for intervening period. Before the labour court, the workmen have filed statement of claim and the petitioner co. has filed the written statement. Separate references were filed for each workmen. According to the petitioner Co. before the labour court, the concerned department was closed and the production was stopped and by letter dated 1. 12. 1982, they were discharged from service with effect from 1. 1. 1983 on account of closure of cups and saucers department from 1/01/1983. Another contention raised in the written statement was to the effect that the workmen who have not completed 240 days of service are not entitled to any retrenchment compensation and none of the workmen had completed 240 days of service in respective year and the compensation was offered on 31. 12. 1982 but they refused to accept it. On behalf of the respondent workmen, one Premaben was examined vide Exh. 13 and on behalf of the opponent, one Chhanabhai was examined vide Exh. 36. The labour Court has considered the detail of working days in paragraph 10 of the award and ultimately, the labour court has come to the conclusion that the petitioner co. has violated the provisions of section 25f of the ID Act and, therefore, the termination order is illegal and deserves to be set aside and ultimately, the labour court has granted reinstatement in service with full back wages for the intervening period with effect from lst January, 1983 by award dated 6th January, 1989.

(