Satish Kumar Mittal, J.

The workman has filed the instant Letters Patent Appeal against the order dated 28.7.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby Civil Writ Petition. No. 9248 of 2000, filed by the appellant challenging the award dated 23.3.1999 (Annexure P-1), passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-I, Faridabad, has been dismissed. Vide award dated 23.3,1999, while rejecting the claim of the workman, the Labour Court came to the conclusion that since the workman had failed to establish that he had continuously worked for 240 days in a calendar year, therefore, termination of his services could not be said to be in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). After taking into consideration the evidence led by the parties, the Labour Court further arrived at the conclusion that the workman had worked only for 222 days in the twelve calendar months prior to termination of his services. The contention of the workman that while calculating 240 days in a calendar year, Sundays and other holidays were to be counted, was rejected on the ground that the workman was working on daily