Introduction:

In the case of Lal Chand Jindal v. Regional Manager, Bank of Baroda [2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 117], the Rajasthan High Court set aside the order of the Central Industrial Tribunal (CIT) for failing to consider Sundays and paid holidays while calculating the service period of a Bank of Baroda employee. The petitioner, Lal Chand Jindal, challenged the CIT’s ruling that dismissed his claim for failing to prove he had worked for more than 240 days in the preceding calendar year. The High Court, relying on Section 25-B(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Supreme Court’s precedent in Workmen of American Express International Banking Corporation v. Management of American Express International Banking Corporation, held that Sundays and other paid holidays must be included when determining continuous service. The Court found the CIT’s decision legally unsustainable and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication, ensuring that workmen’s rights under industrial law are upheld.

Arguments of Both Sides:

The petitioner, Lal Chand Jindal, argued that the CIT’s refusal to consider paid holidays and Sundays when calculating his service period violated Section 25-B(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He contended that, as per the Supreme Court’s ruling in Workmen of American Express International Banking Corporation v. Management of American Express International Banking Corporation, any interruption in work due to authorized leave, paid holidays, or weekly offs should not break the continuity of service. The petitioner maintained that he had indeed completed 240 days of service, but the CIT’s flawed calculation led to the wrongful rejection of his claim. He asserted that the tribunal’s interpretation was inconsistent with settled legal principles and sought judicial intervention to correct the injustice.

The respondent, represented by the Regional Manager of Bank of Baroda, countered that the petitioner had failed to meet the statutory requirement of proving 240 days of service in the preceding calendar year. They argued that service continuity should be based solely on actual working days and that holidays or weekly offs should not be counted unless explicitly mentioned in the law. The bank also contended that CIT’s order was justified as it adhered to a strict interpretation of service duration requirements.

Court’s Judgment:

The Rajasthan High Court, after carefully considering the submissions, rejected the respondent’s argument and reaffirmed that under Section 25-B(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, continuous service includes Sundays and paid holidays. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand emphasized that the Supreme Court had already settled this issue in Workmen of American Express International Banking Corporation v. Management of American Express International Banking Corporation, where it was held that all days on which the workman was employed, including weekly offs and paid holidays, must be included in the calculation of continuous service. The Court ruled that the CIT had erred in disregarding this principle and had wrongfully denied the petitioner’s claim. Holding that the award passed by the CIT was legally unsustainable, the Court set aside the order and remitted the case back to the tribunal for fresh adjudication in line with the correct legal position. This judgment strengthens labor rights, ensuring that employers and tribunals adhere to established legal principles when determining service continuity.