It was further claimed that on 10.1.1992 he made a representation demand seeking regularization in the post of Automobile Mechanic but the same was rejected by companymunication dated 30.4.1992.
Alongwith the Appeal Memo, the appellants filed several documents in support of their companytention that respondent had number worked for 240 days.
It was averred that from 2.12.1984 to 10.6.1985 he had worked as an Automobile Mechanic Helper which established that he is a skilled mechanic and entitled to the said post on a regular basis.
The said order of the learned Single Judge was challenged by the appellants in Writ Appeal.
144/1992 .
Respondent challenged the said decision in a Writ Petition Civil Rule No.
In response to it, certain documents were filed in July, 2004.
Respondent filed further affidavit stating that he was called for interview for the post of Junior Security Guard which was open only to companytingent workers who had companypleted 240 days service in a year which substantiated his claim of having worked for more than 240 days.
In the writ petition, prayer was made to quash the said companymunication and for a direction to absorb him in the regular post of Automobile Mechanic with effect from November, 1982 with all incidental benefits.
Appellants further stand was that during the pendency of the writ petition, in December, 2000, demand was raised by several unions for reinstatement for 340 workers of the 180 days category including respondent.
During the companyrse of hearing, Division Bench of the High Court directed the appellants to file some documents.
Counter affidavit was filed by the appellants denying the claim of the respondent that he had been engaged for 240 days.
Factual background in a nutshell is as follows In May, 1992 respondent filed a writ petition before the Guwahati High Court claiming that he had been working as casual worker in ONGC since November, 1982 with intermittent lay offs and but for such intermittent lay offs which were deliberate, he would have worked for more than 240 days and in any event during the period 1989 90 and 1990 91 he had worked companytinuously for more than 240 days.
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the ONGC calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Guwahati High Court, Agartala Bench, dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellants and thereby affirming order passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition Civil Rule No.144/1992 .
