The Labour Court, upon considering the material placed before it, recorded the finding that the petitioner rendered continuous service between 21.10.1991 to 23.04.1994. Having stated so, however, the Labour Court did not deem it appropriate to ascertain whether the petitioner had absconded from work or whether he was orally terminated from service. Further, the Labour Court did not ascertain whether the respondents herein had complied with the provisions of the Act of 1947, in the event his services were terminated. This was the issue for consideration before the Labour Court. Surprisingly, the Labour Court misdirected itself and considered the eligibility of the petitioner for regularization of his services under the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994. Such a relief, in any event, could not have been granted by the Labour Court in the subject I.D. But, having entered into this issue, the Labour Court stated that the petitioner was ineligible to get any benefit under the said G.O., and directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as and when vacancies arise in the Social Welfare Department. It is stated that in spite of this direction, the petitioner has not been appointed till date.
