JUDGMENT R. K. PATRA, J. — Although the validity of the award dated 29.3.1996 made by the Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in I.D. Case No. 12 of 1984 (Annexure-1) is under challenge in this writ petition, it is necessary to briefly state the relevant facts and circumstances which would show the litigious attitude of the petitioner fighting doggedly without any basis. 2. As back as on 3.12.1983 the Government of Orissa in the Labour and Employment Department order No. 15139 referred the following dispute to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhuba¬neswar for adjudication : “Whether the action of the management of Orissa State Whole¬sale Consumers Co-operative Federation Ltd., Bhubaneswar in terminating the services of Sri Govinda Chandra Sahoo, Accountant w.e.f. 13.2.79 is legal and/or justified ? If not to what relief Sri Sahoo is entitled ?” By its award dated 30.6.1993 at Annexure-7 (it took ten years for disposal), the Labour Court answered the dispute as follows : “ That the action of the management of Orissa State whole¬sale Consumer Co-operative Federation Ltd., Bhubaneswar is not material, but the action of the management of Dhenkanal Wholesale Co-operative Stores is not legal and justified but tantamounts to retrenchment to Sri Govinda Chandra Sahoo, Accountant with effect from 13.2.79. The second-party workman Sri Sahoo is entitled to be reinstated in service under first-party No.2 Dhenkanal Whole¬sale Co-operative Stores Ltd. with full back wages from 13.2.79 till the date of his re-employment with continuity and all serv¬ice benefits.” It may be noted here that as per the order of reference, the dispute referred to for adjudication was between the petitioner and Management of Orissa State Wholesale Consumers Co-operative Federation Limited, Bhubaneswar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Federation’), but not any dispute between the petitioner and management of Dhenkanal Wholesale Stores (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Co-operative Stores’). The Labour Court, however, an¬swered that the action in retrenching the petitioner’s service by the Co-operative Stores is not legal and directed the said Co-operative Stores to reinstate him in service. In the circum¬stances, the Co-operative Stores filed writ petition in this Court bearing O.J.C. No. 8485 of 1993 challenging the award of the Labour Court as without jurisdiction. The Labour Court, however, an¬swered that the action in retrenching the petitioner’s service by the Co-operative Stores is not legal and directed the said Co-operative Stores to reinstate him in service. In the circum¬stances, the Co-operative Stores filed writ petition in this Court bearing O.J.C. No. 8485 of 1993 challenging the award of the Labour Court as without jurisdiction. A Bench of this Court by judgment dated 23.3.1995 (Annexure-8) held that as per the reference, the dispute was with regard to the action of the Federation and, as such, the Labour Court could not have decided any dispute between the petitioner and the Co-operative Stores and, accordingly, set aside the award and directed the petitioner to approach the Labour Court to answer the reference which was specifically made to it. Therefore, the Labour Court re-heard the matter and passed the impugned award on 29.3.1996 (Annexure-1) holding that the petitioner is not entitled to got any relief from the Federation. It has held that after his (petitioner’s) relief from the Federation and joining in the Co-operative Stores at Dhenkanal, he became the employee of the Co-operative Stores and when the Federation is no more his employer its refusal to accept him on 13.2.1979 does not amount to termination of serv¬ice and, therefore, question of recording of finding whether the termination of service by the Federation is legal or justified does not arise. 3. The primary question which is required to be answered on the dispute referred to for adjudication is whether by 13.2.1979 the relationship of employer - employee was in exist¬ence between the Federation and the petitioner. The specific case of the Federation is that although the petitioner was appointed as an Accountant under it, he was relieved to join the Co-operative Stores at Dhenkanal where he was absorbed. On his absorption, he became an employee under the Co-operative Stores and lost his lien in the Federation and by 13.2.1979 he was no more under its service and, therefore, the question of his joining the Federa¬tion and refusal by the Federation does not arise. 4. On his absorption, he became an employee under the Co-operative Stores and lost his lien in the Federation and by 13.2.1979 he was no more under its service and, therefore, the question of his joining the Federa¬tion and refusal by the Federation does not arise. 4. There is no dispute that the petitioner was appointed by the Federation by office order No.3124 dated 7.5.1977 provi¬sionally and purely on temporary basis as probationer (C.M.S. Class-III) in the scale of Rs.400-620/- with effect from 1.8.1976 til 30.6.1977 or till the date he was relieved from the Federa¬tion to join in the wholesale Co-operative Stores whichever was earlier. In the said order it was stipulated that he would be absorbed permanently in the service of the Co-operative Stores without any lien in the Federation. Prior to this, the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Orissa in his letter dated 13.1.1977 informed the Presidents of Wholesale Co-operative Stores, Puri/Bhubaneswar/Rourkela/Dhenkanal/Mayurbhanj that persons recruited by the Federation had been imparted intensive theoritical and practical training to manage the post of Accountant who would be permanently absorbed in their respective Co-operative Stores without any lien in the Federation. As per this arrangement, the Federation in its office letter dated 21.8.1977 (Annexure-8) wrote to the Secretary, Co-operative Stores, Dhenkanal stating that the petitioner had been relieved from the Federation on 19.8.1977 to join at Dhenkanal. In the said letter it was indicated that the petitioner be absorbed permanently in the Co-operative Stores, Dhenkanal without any lien in the Federatiion from the date of his joining in the Co-operative Stores. The Co-operative Stores, Dhenkanal in the Board resolution No.6 dated 27.3.1977 (Annexure-8) accepted the joining report of the petitioner as Accountant. In the Board Resolution No.3 dated 3.10.1977 (Annexure- 7) it was also resolved to absorb him in the scale of Rs.400-620/- with three advance increments. From the aforesaid narration of facts, we have no hesitation to hold that the petitioner on being relieved from the moderation on 19.3.1977 joined the Co-operative Stores at Dhenkanal on 27.2.1977 and was absorbed there on 2.10.1977. The petitioner in his written statement filed before the Labour Court admitted that on 19.8.1977 he was relieved from the Federation to join as Accountant in the Co-operative Stores at Dhenkanal. The petitioner in his written statement filed before the Labour Court admitted that on 19.8.1977 he was relieved from the Federation to join as Accountant in the Co-operative Stores at Dhenkanal. This being the factual position, the question of the petitioner’s rejoining the Federation on 13.2.1979 does not arise at all, inasmuch as he could not have rejoined the Federation in view of the fact that he was relieved from the Federation to join the Co-operative Stores at Dhenkanal where he was permanently absorbed as per the resolution No.3 dated 2.10.1977. Therefore, by 13.2.1979 since there was no relationship of employee-employer between the petitioner and the Federation, question of terminat¬ing his service by the letter does not arise. The Labour Court in the impugned order has rightly come to the aforesaid finding which is a pure finding of fact based on appreciation of evidence on record. The is no merit this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. CH. P. K. MISRA, J. I agree. Petition dismissed.