An employer cannot retrench a workman with more than 240 days of service without complying with the conditions for retrenchment under Section 6-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

( 1 ) THE admitted facts are that it was an industry; the employer dispensed with the services of the workman; the workman raised an Industrial dispute; the Industrial Tribunal gave its award holding that the workman had worked more than 240 days in a year when his services were dispensed with and so his services could not be terminated. But the Tribunal did not order his reinstatement and instead ordered that retrenchment compensation be given to the workman. It is against this order that the workman has filed the present writ petition and he prays that his reinstatement should be ordered. It is contested by the employer.

( 2 ) THE finding of the Tribunal that the workman had worked for more than 240 days in the preceding year has not been assailed and the only argument of the employer is that this period of 240 days was not continuous because during this period his services were extended several times after a break of a few days and his services came to an end automatically after the period provided in his appointment order. Moreover, it has been submitted that the employee should have been appointed after consultation with Institutional Service Board, while he was not appointed in this manner and was appointed by the Management without being selected by the institutional Service Board.

( 3 ) THE term continuous service has been defined in Section 2 (g) of the U. P. Industrial Disputes act, 1947. It means uninterrupted service, and includes service which may be interrupted merely on account of cessation of work, which is not due to any fault on the part of the workman. In the case before us it was the employer who made the workman to cease in an artificial manner just in the hope that this may amount to interruption, but it will not amount to interruption as the cessation of work was not due to any fault of the workman. This provision further says that the workman, who during a period of twelve calendar months has actually worked in an industry for not less than two hundred and forty days, shall be deemed to have completed one year of continuous service. In the case before us, there is unassailed finding that the workman actually worked for 240 days. So, it will be deemed that he has completed continuous service of one year.

( 4 ) THE term retrenchment is also defined in clause (s) of the aforesaid Section. It says that retrenchment means the termination by the employer of the service of a workman for any reason whatsoever otherwise than as punishment by way of disciplinary action. In the case before us, it is not the case of any one that the workman was made to cease as a measure of punishment. So, whatever may be the reason for termination of the service, in the case before us, it was retrenchment of the workman.

( 5 ) REGARDING retrenchment there are some restrictions, which have been provided in Section 6-N. It says that no workman who has been in continuous service for not less than one year, shall be retrenched by that employer until certain conditions have been satisfied. The first such condition is that the workman has been given one months notice in writing indicating the reasons for his retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice wages for the period of notice. This condition was not satisfied in this case because neither the workman was given any notice nor he was paid wages in lieu thereof. No doubt, there is a proviso to this clause. It provides that no such notice shall be necessary if the retrenchment is under an agreement which specifies a date for the termination of service. In the case before us, the appointment was for a fixed period-say for three months and thereafter a break of two ortermination of service. In the case before us, the appointment was for a fixed period-say for three months and thereafter a break of two or three days the workman was again given employment. An agreement is something which signifies that both part