State Coop. Land Development Bank Ltd. Vs. Taz Mulk Ansari  INSC 418 (11
P.B. SAWANT, P.B. SINGH N.P. (J) CITATION: 1994 SCC Supl. (2) 745
1. Leave granted, Heard parties.
view of the fact that the workmen were engaged under an agreement for a
specified period, their case is covered by the proviso to clause (a) of Section
6-N of the U.P.
Disputes Act, 1947. In view of this, it is unnecessary to go into the question
as to whether the provisions of the Central Act or of the State Act would apply
in the present case. The High Court by the impugned order has granted regularisation
of the workmen on the ground that the workmen had put in more than 240 days as
daily-rated employees in a year. There have since been decisions of this Court
which have taken the view that mere service of 240 days in a year does not
entitle a workman to regularisation of his employment.
is an admitted fact that the respondent-workmen had earlier appeared before the
Selection Board and had failed in the selection. Thereafter, they + Arising out
of SLP (C) No. 7579 of 1993 746 approached the High Court by the present writ
petition, and the High Court granted them regularisation in service on the only
ground that they had put in more than 240 days of service in a year. The
undisputed record shows that the respondent-workmen were every time employed at
a time for only three months and their last employment was only for 17 days.
Their service was to come to an end on the expiry of the said 17 days. In view
of the proviso to clause (a) of Section 6-N no notice for terminating their
service was necessary. The termination of their services is, therefore, valid.
In this view of the matter, the appeal is allowed and the decision of the High
Court is set aside. In the circumstances of the case there will be no order as