JUDGMENT C.K. Prasad, J. 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the award dated March 29, 1988 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, whereby it has directed the petitioner to reinstate respondent No. 2 as permanent sub-staff. 2. Short facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that a reference was made to the Tribunal by the Central Government dated July 1, 1987 for adjudication as to whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India, i.e., the petitioner in terminating the services of respondent No. 2 is justified and if not, to what relief he shall be entitled? According to respondent No. 2 he was engaged by the petitioner Bank as part time Farrash/ Safai Karmachari from April 15, 1984 to October 1985 for cleaning and sweeping office premises. According to respondent No. 2 he was paid consolidated wages @ Rs. 60/- per month upto December 1984 and Rs. 100/- p.m. from January 1985 to October 1985. In addition thereto he was paid wage of Rs. 6/- per day for the aforesaid period. It is the stand of respondent No. 2 that he continuously worked from April 15, 1984 to October 1985 and from November 1985 his service was terminated, but before doing so, pay in lieu of notice nor any retrenchment compensation was given to him. According to the petitioner respondent No. 2 was not employed on regular basis and hence before terminating his service it was not necessary to give pay in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation. 3. The Tribunal on appreciation of evidence found that respondent No. 2 has continuously worked for 240 days and his service was terminated without pay in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation. Accordingly by the impugned award it directed for reinstatement of respondent No. 2 in service, but without any back wages. 4. Mr. Vegad appears on behalf of petitioner. Inspite of service of notice on respondent No. 2, nobody has chosen to appear on his behalf. It is relevant here to state that by the order dated November 4, 1988 a Division Bench of this Court stayed the operation of the impugned award only to the extent that respondent No. 2 shall not be made permanent w.e.f.. November 1, 1985. Mr. It is relevant here to state that by the order dated November 4, 1988 a Division Bench of this Court stayed the operation of the impugned award only to the extent that respondent No. 2 shall not be made permanent w.e.f.. November 1, 1985. Mr. Vegad appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that according to the stand of respondent No. 2 himself he was appointed as a part time Farrash/Safai Karmachari from April 15, 1984 and he continued as such till October 1985 and in that view of the matter the Tribunal erred in law in directing for reinstatement of respondent No. 2 in service as permanent sub- staff. From the perusal of the award of the Tribunal it is apparent that the case of respondent No. 2 before was that he was engaged as part time Farrash from April 15, 1984 to October 1985. In such a situation, I am of the opinion that the Tribunal erred in directing the petitioner Bank to reinstate respondent No. 2 in service as permanent sub-staff. The award of the Tribunal to that extent cannot be sustained and the same is modified and it is directed that the respondent No. 2 shall be reinstated in service on the same terms and conditions which were admissible to him at the time of his termination. 5. To put the record straight it may be stated that Mr. Vegad has not challenged the order of the Tribunal so far it has directed for reinstatement of respondent No. 2 in service, but has prayed for quashing of only that portion of the award by which respondent No. 2 was directed to be reinstated as permanent sub-staff. 6. In the result, writ petition is partly allowed. The Award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to cost. Security amount, if deposited, shall be refunded to the petitioner.