K.S. Lodha, J.-One Nisar Abmad was employed as a casual labourer with the Works Inspector, Bikaner on

18.4.77 and the worked intermittently up to 30.12.79, when his services are said to have been terminated by a verbal order without following the procedure laid down u/sec.25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Railway Casual Labourer Union thereupon raised a dispute on 9.83 and the Central Government referred the matter to the learned Judge, Central Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur. The case of the present petitioner was that Nisar Abmad did not regularly work from 18.4.77 to 30.12.79 but had been engaged from time to time intermittently whenever there was work available for him. It was also urged that his services were not terminated by the petitioners but he himself ceased to come to work and, therefore, it was not necessary for them to comply with the provisions of Section 25F. The learned Judge, Labour Court held that although Nisar Abmad had not put in more than 240 days of work in a calendar year but was regular workmen and his services could be terminated only by complying with the provisions of Section 25G. He, therefore, made an award holding that the termination of N