V. K. Bali, J.

1. Vide orders dated April 20, 1981, the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Haryana, Rohtak invalidated the order by which the services of the respondent workman were terminated. The aforesaid decision was rendered on a reference having been made to the Labour Court by the Government under Sec.10 (1) (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act for adjudication of the dispute between Randhir Singh, workman and the management of M/s. Haryana State Electricity Board, Chandigarh.

2. From the pleadings of the parties, the Labour Court framed the following issues:-

(1) Whether Shri Jaspal Singh, Law Officer of the H. S. E. B. is not competent to represent the management? (2) Whether the written statement is not signed by the competent authority. If not, to what effect? (3) As per the reference. (4) Whether an alternative post was offered to the workman and not accepted by him. If so to what effect?

3. While discussing issues Nos.3 and 4 which are the crucial issues the Labour Court found as a matter of fact that the respondent workman was appointed on October 27, 1972 as Assistant Line-man initially on temporary basis for six months but his term of service was extended from t