JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records connected with the common award of the Labour Court in I.D.No.574 to 579 of 2004 passed by the first respondent on 13.12.2007 and quash the same in respect of the petitioner in I.D.No.574 of 2004 is concerned and further direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner with backwages, continuity of service with all attendant benefits.

The awards of the Labour Court dated 13.12.2007 in I.D.Nos.574 to 579 of 2004 are under challenge in the present writ petitions.

2. The writ petitioners state that they have joined as Mazdoor in the second respondent's Management Agricultural Research Station and were employed in Thooppampalayam Agricultural Farm for the activities connected with Agricultural production and for raising all crops, including cash crops. Admittedly, the writ petitioners were engaged as daily rated wage employees in the Agricultural Research Station functioning under the control of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University which was constituted under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Act. The writ petitioners state that they have served as daily rated wage employees for a considerable length of period and completed 240 days of continuous work in a year and 480 days in 2 years.

3. The learned counsel for the writ petitioners state that when the writ petitioners have served more than 10 years and engaged as daily rated employee, the services ought to have been regularized in the sanctioned post in the time scale of pay. Contrarily, the petitioners were terminated from service orally. Therefore, the petitioners approached the Labour Court in I.D.No.574 to 579 of 2004.

4. The Labour Court adjudicated the issues and considered the points (i) whether Agricultural Research Station is an industry or not, (ii) whether the petitioners are entitled to seek for regularization of service, even though they have completed 240 days of continuous work in a year and 480 days in 2 years, (iii) whether the petitioners are entitled for any other relief.

5. In respect of point No.1, the Labour Court arrived at a conclusion that though the Agricultural Research Station is an unit of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, governed by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Act, the research station is amendable to the provisions of the Industrial Dispute Act and it is an industry and the point was answered accordingly. The High Court, in a similar issue, held that Agricultural Research Station established under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Act is an industry in the case of 1981 (1) LLJ 12 (LIC of India vs. D.J.Bahadur).

6. The Labour Court made a finding that the State Farm whose main activity is to produce hybrid quality seed to be supplied to Government. However, in respect of the second point raised, the labour Court arrived at a conclusion that the petitioners have not completed 240 days of service. Even if they completed 240 days of service, they cannot seek the relief of regularization of service and accordingly, rejected the claim of the writ petitioners for grant of regularization. Third point raised was also decided against the writ petitioners and accordingly, the petitions filed by the writ petitioners were dismissed.

7. The learned counsel for the writ petitioners submitted that the petitioners have filed a petition to set aside the oral termination for reinstatement and they have also asked for the benefit of regularization or permanent absorption. However, the labour Court has not discussed about the oral termination. Therefore, the award of the labour Court is to be scrapped.

8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents disputed the contention raised by the writ petitioners by stating that the writ petitioners were engaged as daily rated wage employees and have not served continuously. They were engaged as Mazdoor, a