In the present case, admittedly, petitioner had not completed 240 days of service prior to his termination. Petitioner had challenged his termination after a gap of eight years by serving demand notice on 07.01.2011 alleging that his termination on 02.05.2002 had been ordered without following due process of law. However, respondent- Management had placed reliance on resignation submitted by the petitioner. The case of the petitioner was that the said resignation had been taken under pressure. However, petitioner had failed to establish the said fact. A criminal case was also registered against the petitioner on the directions of this Court as the experience certificate submitted by the petitioner was found to be fictitious. However, later petitioner was acquitted in the said case. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the learned Tribunal rightly held that the petitioner was not entitled to grant any relief as he had failed to establish that the resignation submitted by him had been taken under pressure.
