RAMAPRASADA RAO, J.

1. The petitioner in W.P. No. 4452 of 1974 questions the jurisdiction of the Additional Commissioner for Workmens Compensation, Madras, to entertain an appeal filed by its employee-first respondent under S. 41 of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act 1947, hereinafter called the Act. The first respondent was entertained by the petitioner-company as its Madras representative in or about February 1969. The first respondents services were terminated with effect from 28th February 1971. On the ground that no reasonable cause has been adduced for such termination and as the prescribed mandate under S. 41 of the Act was not complied with, the first respondent questioned the validity of the order of termination of service. The petitioners case is that the first respondent was appointed purely on a temporary basis and for purposes of experimenting its project for expansion and that the intention from the beginning was that the post filled up by the first respondent in connection with such expansion could be abolished if they could not achieve the objective for expansion of their trade. As the project did not produce satisfactory results, the petitioner wa