Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Honorary Secretary Sri v. Jawahar

THE HONBLE LABOUR COURT-|, Chandravihar Buildings, V.L. nciiO, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Presiding Officer. Mr. V. Venkateshwar Rao, S/o. Narsimha Murthy, aged 27 yearc, Rl/o. H.No. 8-2-2691191381/8, Road No. 2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, lncharge Labour, Secretariat, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 o'f the C, circumstances stated in the affidavit file pleased to issue notice call for record, qua No. 175 of 2O05 dated '15-03-2010, on t Hyderabad, by issuing a Writ of Certiorari o orders or direction or directions onstitufon'.6f firdia praying that in the d therewith, -lhe High Court maY be sh and set aside the Award made in lD he file of the Honble Labour Court-|, r any otherupprogliit" Writ, or order or ,.. ":(' t l.A. NO: 2OF 2010(WPMP. NO :24751 OF 20101 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased suspend the operation of the Award made in lD No. 1 75 of 2005 dated 1 5-03-2010 on the file of the Hon'ble Labour Court-|, Hyderabad pending disposal of the Writ Petition I.A. NO: 1 OF 2010 (WVMP. NO:5 261 0F 2010) Between: Mr.V.VenkateshwarRao,S/o.Narsimha.Murthy,aged2Tyea's,Fl/o.H.No. ii:2-i6silisl3817e, no"d lrio. 2, Banjara Hills' Hvderabad' PETITIONER/RESPONDENT Q.'e AND

1. I .) M/S. HYDERABAD GYMKHANA' PIot !'lo' 7A' and 78' Road No 2' Banjara iiili", iiyd;;6;;, n"p ui iis Honorary Secretary SriV Jawahar' ...RESPONDE NT/PETITIONER THE HONBLE LABOUR COURT-l thandravihar Buildings' M'J Road' Hyderabad, Rep. by its Presiding Officer' ThestateofAndhraPradesh,Rep'byitsSecretary'lnchargeLabour' Secretariat, HYderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,lne Hign Court may be pleased vac-ate ii'i" .i"v grr"t"d in wPN/P No .24i51 of 2o1o dated 10'08'2010 in wP No 19528 of 2O1O i^ Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. O RAVISHANKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos'1&3: GP FOR LABOUR Counsel for the ResPondent No.2: -' The Court made the following: ORDER 5pl,} s I I *7 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA WRrT PETTTION No.19528 of 2O1O $, ORDER: This writ petition is filed against the Award dated 15.03.201O, passed by the learned presiding Officer, Labour Court-l AP, Hyderabad.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner is present. Heard arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioner on 28.01.2025 itself and adjourned thc matter for arguments of respondents' Counsel, but he did not turn up.

3. 'a'_!r- -7 Learned Counsel lor the petitioner stated that respondent No.2 had joined as a part time bearer on. 19.O4.2O03 in the petitioner's society i.e., M/s.Hyderabad "Gy-inkhana and he was paid on hourly basis @ Rs.13.05 ps., whic\ works out to Rs.180O/- per month. However, termination etter was served on the respondent No.2 on 26.04.2OOS, statin$ that his training period has come to an end on 24.O3.2OO5. Against the said Order, he preferred an appeal before the Industriai Disputes Tribunal. The Industrial Disputes Tribunal after considering the entire evidence, directed the petitioner herein to reinstate the respondent No.2 as bearer with continuity of service and with 1 ) I ,[l 2 50% of back rvages within one month after publication of the Award. e, .r+ !-+!

4. It is stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that as per the Orders of the tribunal, they already reinstated the respondent No.2 and it is brought to the notice of this Court that subsequent to the reinstatement of the respondent No.2, he absented to the duties unauthorizedly, as such enquiry was conducted anci he was terminated from the services. He furttpr stated that the Order of the tribunal that respondent No.2 had completed 240 working days in 12 continuous calendar months is in contravention of Section 25-B of the Industrial Disputes Act and it cannot be counted 240 days prior to the termination and thus he is not entitled for continui.ty of Sprvice. He relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex. Court in the cases of Range Forest OfJicer ys. S.T.Hadimini,l and Surendranagar District Panchagat Vs. :' Dahgabhai Amqrsinll a nd also in the case of Rajasthan State Ganganagar S.Mills Ltd., Vs. State of Rajasth.an and ' (2002) 3 scc 25 ' 1zoos1 s scc zso , f r r) anothers, in support of his contention. Therefore, requested this Court to set aside the Award passed by the tribunal.

5. Admittedly, the tribunal observed that respondent No.2 worked continuously from 79.04.2003 to 23.O4.2005, which was more than 12 continuous calendar months and more than 240 working days in l2 continuous calendar months, but it is in contravention of definition of continuity of service as laid down under Section 25(B) of the Industrial Disputes Act' \ Therefore, the direction of the tribunal regarding contiguity of service is not sustainable and it is liable to be set aside' Regarding back wages, respondent No.2 was appointed as trainee and on completion of training, letter of termination was issued. However, considering the directions of the Industrial Tribunal, respondent No.2 was rernstatld by the petitioner' Even afterwards, respondent No.2 could not discharge his duties properly and absented to the duties uriauthorizedly and thus he was again terminated. 'l'herefore, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to set aside the Award passed by the industrial tribunal. ' (2004) 8 SCC 16l 7 4

6. In the result, the present writ petition is allowed and the Award passed by rhe Industrial Tribunal dated 15.O3.2010 in ei'-* I.D.No. 175 of 20O5 is set aside. There shall be no order as to CoStS. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. / That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as above' Witness the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul' 'rn this Friday' The Seventh Day Of February Two Thousand And Twenty Five ,. //TRUE COPY// 1t\ SD/.K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR \ \ SECTION OFFICER To, l.THEPresidingofficerHONBLELABoURCoURT.|ChandraviharBuildings, M.J. Road, HYderabad. - nvoelioao. 2. The Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, tnEbatge&bour' Secretariat' 3. One CC to SRl. D RAVISHANKAR RAO Advocate [OPUC] 4.TwoCCstoGPFoRLABoUR'HighCourtfortheStat$.ofTelangana.[oUTl -.I-,i'

5. Two CD CoPies KKS BS /' r. HIGH COURT DATED:07102/,2025 &,:* ORDER WP.No.19528 ot 2010 a ,t I I -r HE S ,( ) ." I tr i 0ll liny')uj (1\( z .o3 s,,4rcHE$ ,!6I v,.t.' i ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS / /t JB /L,