Table of Content
1. employment classification based on genuine necessity. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 6)
2. burden of proof lies with employer to justify fixed-term status. (Para 7 , 8)

In a framework of statute-guaranteed security of employment however, where the termination of a workman's employment without just cause or excuse may be subject to an award of reinstatement by the Industrial court (see Section 20 of the Act , and the case of Dr. Dutt v. Assunta Hospital in Federal court Civil Appeal No. 276 of 1980 for the section's origins, interpretation and raison d'etre) it would be an obvious loophole if any employer could evade the statutory protection by making a series of contracts of finite duration with his workmen. In other words, employers could engage their workmen on a succession of fixedterm contracts of, say three months duration each and simply fail to re-engage particular workmen whom they wanted to get rid of without having to face a claim for reinstatement. This would, to quote from Dr. Dutt's case, make nonsense of the whole purpose and intent of, and stultify, the Act as well as offend well-known principles of interpretation of statutes.

In Han Chiang (supra) the court dis

Click Here to Read the rest of this document