Termination of employment by effluxion of time, as specified in an appointment order, constitutes retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, if the employee has completed the required period of continuous service.

Veeraswami, C.J.

This appeal raises a point with reference to which to the arguments are somewhat nicely balanced. The respondent, a B. Sc., graduate of the Madras University was employed between July 4, 1970, and November 18, 1972, as a cashier in the Kuzhithurai branch of the appellant-bank. There were intermitant breaks in the service. The last order of appointment dated November 10, 1972, recited that the respondent was appointed with effect from that date for a period of nine days on a salary of Rs. 200 per mensem and dearness and other allowances as applicable under the Desai Award. This followed certain terms and conditions, of which the first two are :

"(1) The appointment is purely a temporary one for a period of 9 days but may be terminated earlier, without assigning any reason therefor at the bank's discretion;

(2) The employment, unless terminated earlier, will automatically cease at the expiry of the period, i.e., 18-11-1972" *

There was the third condition, which prescribed that if the respondent wished to leave the service before he should give 14 days' notice in writing failing which he would be held liable for a week's pay. Curiously, the last term was that the temporary appointment would not confer on the respondent any right to claim for absorption in the bank's permanent establishment in any category. The respondent applied to have this order of appointment quashed and a direction to the appellant to repost him as cashier. The ground of the respondent was that he had actually worked for 240 days, that as such he had a continuous service which qualified him for his statutory retrenchment compensation under S.25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and that since this provision was not complied with, the order limiting the period of service amounting to termination was invalid. K. N. Mudaliyar, J., who considered the petition, allowed it on the view that although there was no separate order terminating the respondent's services, the provision in the appointment order aforesaid bringing about an automatic termination amounted to a termination and a "retrenchment" within the meaning of the term as defined by S.2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act. He quashed the appointment order, but said that he would forbear from giving any further direction. The bank appeals.

2. Mr. M. R. Narayanaswami for the appellant-bank submits that,

(1) there is no termination in this case of the respondent's services so as to satisfy the definition of 'retrenchment'; and

(2) in any case retrenchment could only be of surplus labour, which was not the case here.

The definition of "retrenchment" says that it means the termination by the employer of the service of a workman for any reason whatsoever, otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by way of disciplinary action. Three categories of termination or cessation of services are excluded from the purview of the definition such as voluntary retirement of the workman, retirement on superannuation in case the contract of employment provides for cessation of the service at that stage and termination of the service of workman on the ground of continued ill-health. Section 25F makes it a condition precedent to retrenchment of a workman that he be given a month's notice in writing indicating the reason for retrenchment or in the alternative he be paid wages for the period of notice in lieu of it. There is a proviso to the effect that no such notice is necessary if the retrenchment is under an agreement which specifies a date for the termination of service. One other qualifying requisite for retrenchment is that the workman should have been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer. "Continuous service" has been defined too. But there is no dispute in this case that the respondent had put in such continuous service. The appellant's stand with reference to retrenchment as defined, is that it is not any termination that will fall within within its purview, but onl