The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the appointment letter and its implications on retrenchment under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Shukla appearing for the workman-petitioner and Mr. Gaur appearing for the management.

2. The only question involved in this petition is with respect to the interpretation of the appointment letter dated 1st July, 2005 and whether it would fall within exemption in Sub-section (bb) of Section 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [for short, "the Act"] to take the appointment out of the teeth of retrenchment and therefore compliance of Section 25-F of the Act. To understand the drift of the argument, the best document is the appointment letter itself and it is reproduced:--

"DPSF/P-87

Mr. Vijay Kumar

July 01, 2005

I am pleased to offer you temporary appointment as a helper, peon, in General Duty at Delhi Public School, Faridabad for a period of six months on a consolidated salary of Rs. 3200/- (Rupees Three Thousand two hundred only) per month all inclusive w.e.f 1st July, 2005.

Your services are purely temporary and can be terminated at any time without any prior notice and assigning the reason.

If the above terms and conditions of service are acceptable to you, please give your written consent.

Sd/-Manager"

3. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Faridabad vide the impugned award dated 11th May, 2012 has non-suited the workman on the ground that the appointment is contractual in nature and was purely temporary and thus, the workman did not acquire any legal right to hold the post. When this finding was returned, it followed sequitur that the services of the workman were dispensed with legally and in accordance with law. For this reason alone, the reference was declined and the relief of reinstatement and consequential benefits was denied to the workman.

4. Cases which fall under the exceptions to retrenchment in Section 2(oo) of the Act are always differently worded which manifest the intention of the parties that they are entering into a contract fixed by tenure, duration or period of time by a stipulation contained in this behalf in the appointment order. As I read the appointment order in this case, I cannot see that the appointment is contractual as was asserted vehemently by the management. The management did not say that it was pleased to offer a contractual appointment fixed by time. Merely because six months period has been mentioned in the appointment letter would not make the appointment one on contract. The nature of the appointment or engagement on contract is always a matter in the realm of the intention of the parties and the intention of the parties has to be gathered from the words expressly used in the letter of appointment, subsequent events and the surrounding circumstances. When we look at the surrounding circumstances, then the Court is informed by Mr. Shukla that on expiry of the appointment letter dated 1st July, 2005 the period of service was extended by another six months period prescribed in the letter by a fresh letter which added a new twist to the tale when the word, " ad hoc" was been used in the second appointment letter. Ad hoc service is well known in service jurisprudence as not by nature contractual unless the two elements are mixed up to form a single formulation. It is an arrangement for the time being, that is ad hoc and till some better option is available to the employer, the management or the State to make regular recruitment in accordance with the rules or Certified/Model Standing Orders if the employment is private, as the case may be.

5. It would do well to notice the provisions of Section 2(oo)(bb) to put the case in its right perspective and, therefore, the statutory definition of Section 2(oo)(bb) is reproduced below for quick reference : -

"2. Definitions : XXX

(oo) "retrenchment" 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, but does not include --

XXX

(bb) termination of the service of the workman as a result of the non-ren