Judgment 1. We have heard learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the order of the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition. 2. The appellant-workman alongwith others was given a part-time job in a Government School. On availability of the regular Class-IV employees his services were dispensed with. On an industrial dispute being raised, the State Government made a reference to the Labour Court on the question of regularisation of services of appellant-workman and the similarly situated persons and further the legality of the order of removal. The Labour Court after appreciation of evidence passed the award against the workman. As far as the regularisation is concerned, the Labour Court found the order of removal bad, illegal and violative of Section 25 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but instead of reinstatement, directed to pay a lump sum compensation in the sum of Rs.17,000/-. 3. The learned Single Judge found that the concerned workmen were appointed on part-time basis in flagrant violation of the rules. The appointment of the workmen was de hors the rules. By following various decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court, the Court confirmed the award on the question of regularisation as well as award of compensation in lieu of re-instatement. Since, the appointment of the respondent-workman alongwith others was de hors the rules as they were only part-time workers and further the appointment was set aside on the technical breach of the rule. Both the Courts below rightly found that the respondent-workman could have been awarded compensation in lieu of re-instatement. 4. No interference is warranted with the order of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the special appeal stands dismissed.