Rajiv Sharma, J.

The State of Uttar Pradesh has challenged the validity of Award dated 23.07.2011, rendered by Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Haridwar in Adjudication Case No. 183/2009 (Old Adjudication Case No. 36 of 2006).

2. Key facts necessary for adjudication of this petition are that respondent/workman was engaged as Beldar on 01.02.1988. He was retrenched on 01.01.1991 without following the provisions of Section 6(N) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “The Act, 1947”) and Rule 42 of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as “The Rules, 1957”). Thereafter, the workman raised an industrial dispute. The matter was referred to the Labour Court. The workman filed the claim petition. The reply was filed by the employer.

3. According to the averments made in the claim petition, the workman had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year. The Award was passed in favour of the workman on 23.07.2011. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. Smt. Beena Pandey, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State of U.P./petitioners has vehemently argued that the respondent/workman had not worked for 240 da