Continuous engagement for more than 240 days in a calendar year is crucial for claiming benefits under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act.

ORDER :

Sangeeta Chandra, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner who is the workman challenging the award dated 05.04.2007 in adjudication case No. 47 of 2006. It is the case of the petitioner as pleaded in the writ petition that he had applied for being appointed as conductor in the U.P.S.R.T.C. hereinafter referred to as the employer and the Assistant Regional Manager asked the petitioner to submit all relevant documents on 29.09.1973 for enabling the employer to complete the personal file of the workman. The petitioner was thereafter asked to deposit security money of Rs. 200/-which he did on 11.10.1973 and on 16.10.1973 he was sent for training for seven days before being appointed as Conductor. The petitioner was appointed as Conductor on 04.11.1973 at Allahabad Depot. He continued to work as Conductor for more than 240 days in a year and, therefore, was entitled for protection under Section 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. On one occasion i.e. on 19.10.1974 while the petitioner was on duty, his bus was checked and out of 61 passengers, 21 passengers were found to be traveling without ticket, a show cause notice was issued on him on 21.10.1974 and the petitioner submitted his reply on 28.10.1974. The reply of the petitioner was duly considered and he was awarded minor punishment of forfeiture of three months Good Conduct Allowance. It has been pleaded that it is apparent from the punishment order dated 16.12.1974 that the petitioner was in continuous service of the corporation from 04.11.1973 at least up to 16.12.1974. It is the case of the petitioner also that from time to time he had deposited the fare that he had collected while services as Conductor on City Bus Service at Allahabad and three such receipts dated 03.06.1974, 03.03.1975 and 27.04.1975 were submitted as Exhibits in the list of documents before the opposite party No. 2 to substantiate his claim that he had been continuously working with the employer and was entitled for benefit of Section 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act but without following the procedure as prescribed under the Act his services were terminated orally w.e.f. 30.06.1975.

2. It has been submitted that against the oral termination order, the petitioner approached the Regional Manager by way of representation on 16.07.1975 which was rejected on 16.12.1977 as being time barred. The petitioner thereafter, preferred an appeal before the Deputy General Manager Eastern Zone U.P.S.R.T.C on 29.12.1977 and moved a representation on 31.05.1979 before the Deputy Chief Manager Eastern Zone, Varanasi requesting for decision on appeal and for reinstatement. As the employer did not give any notice of orders passed on his representation and appeal, he again moved an application to the Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C. Allahabad which was rejected on 02.08.1979 by non speaking order. Information was derived of such order by the petitioner on 24.11.1979. Since the petitioner's appeal was not being decided, the petitioner again represented on 23.07.2003 and, thereafter, approached this Court by filing the Writ Petition No. 38726 of 2003. The said writ petition was dismissed on 28.07.2004 by this Court at Allahabad directing the petitioner to approach the Labor Court in the matter. The petitioner thereafter, filed a claim petition before the Deputy Labor Commissioner, Lucknow who sent his recommendation to the Government and Reference under Section 4K of the Act was made on 25.01.2006. The Reference as framed by the Government was to the effect "whether the employers have illegally terminated the services of Kapil Dev Singh Yadav S/o Sudarshan Singh Yadav, Conductor orally w.e.f. 01.07.1975. If so, to what relief was the workman entitled? "

3. It has been submitted that in pursuance of such Reference being made, affidavits were exchanged between the parties, documentary evidence was also filed, oral evidence was led in which the petitioner clearly stated that he had been engaged by the