Padam Singh vs Presiding Officer Industrial Cum ...

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 10047 P&H
Judgement Date : 9 May, 2024

Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member Services -- Sign up today and get free trial for one month.

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Padam Singh vs Presiding Officer Industrial Cum ... on 9 May, 2024

LAVISHA
2024.05.14 15:43
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
                                         By this common order, following six writ petitions would

                            stand disposed of.

                            2.          Out of the aforesaid six writ petitions, three have been filed

                            by the workman(s) for the purpose of modification of the award passed

                            by learned Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court - III, Faridabad,

                            whereby, instead of reinstatement with continuity in service, a lump sum

LAVISHA
2024.05.14 15:43
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
                             amount of compensation in full and final settlement of their claims have

                            been awarded to them.

                            3.             Other three writ petitions have been filed by the

                            Management (HUDA) against the findings recorded by learned Tribunal

                            to the effect that there is violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial

                            Disputes Act, 1947.

                            4.             Details of the writ petitions filed by the workman(s) are as

                            under:-

                                      1)   CWP-17706-2017 filed by workman - Padam Singh,

                                      2)   CWP-17988-2017 filed by workman - Laxman, and

                                      3)   CWP-17990-2017 filed by workman - Sunder

                                           Details of the writ petitions filed by the Management

                            (HUDA) are as under:-

                                      1)   CWP-29535-2017,

                                      2)   CWP-29525-2017, and

                                      3)   CWP-29754-2017

                            5.             For the purpose of clarity, working period of all the three

                            workmen namely Padam Singh, Sunder and Laxman, are as under:-

                            i)             Workman namely Padam Singh (petitioner in CWP-17706-

                            2017), worked from February, 2002, to 22.11.2008 as a 'Cleaner' on

                            Sewer Cleaning Machine and drew salary of Rs.5,000/- per month.

                            Learned Labour Court awarded a lump sum amount of compensation of

                            Rs.1,25,000/- to him.

                            ii)            Workman namely Sunder (petitioner in CWP-17990-2017),

                            worked from January, 2008, to 02.07.2012, as a Sewer Cleaning Machine

LAVISHA
2024.05.14 15:43
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
                             Driver and drew a salary of Rs.7,200/- per month. Learned Labour Court

                            awarded a lump sum amount of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to him.

                            iii)        Similarly, workman namely Laxman (petitioner in CWP-

                            17988-2017), worked as Sewer Cleaning Machine Driver from the month

                            of January, 2002 to 22.11.2008, and drew a salary of Rs.7,000/- per

                            month. Learned Labour Court awarded a lump sum amount of

                            compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- to him.

                            6.          Since, the Management is one i.e. Haryana Urban

                            Development    Authority    (HUDA),     now    Haryana    Shehri   Vikas

                            Pradhikaran (HSVP), and the dispute raised by all the three workmen

                            who were working in the office of Haryana Urban Development

                            Authority (HUDA), Sector - 12, Faridabad, is almost similar, the facts

                            are being extracted from CWP-17706-2017 filed by workman namely

                            Padam Singh.

                            7.          Workman - Padam Singh pleaded that he was appointed as a

                            'Cleaner' on Sewer Cleaning Machine by HUDA (Management) in the

                            month of February, 2002 in Sub-Division No.1, Haryana Urban

                            Development Authority (HUDA), Faridabad, on the orders of Executing

                            Engineer and he worked there under JE Sh. H.S. Jakhar for about one

                            year, and thereafter, he was transferred in Sub Division No.3 in the year

                            2003, where he had been working continuously under Sub Divisional

                            Engineer namely Sh. Gurvinder Singh and JE Sh. Mohinder Pal.

                                        He prayed that his last drawn wages were Rs.5,000/- per

                            month and he was removed from his services illegally on 22.11.2008,




LAVISHA
2024.05.14 15:43
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
                             despite rendering continuous services for 240 days in the preceding one

                            year of his termination.

                                           Workman - Padam Singh further pleaded that before his

                            termination,    neither    any   notice,   notice   pay   nor   retrenchment

                            compensation etc. were given to him. Therefore, there was complete

                            violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

                                           He also pleaded that at his place, a new 'Sewer Machine

                            Cleaner' was appointed and therefore, there is also violation of Sections

                            25-G and 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

                                           Thus, he prayed for reinstatement with continuity in service

                            along with full back wages.

                            8.             On the other hand, pleaded case of the Management

                            (HUDA) was that Padam Singh (workman) was not engaged by it

                            (HUDA) and therefore, there is no relationship of employer and

                            employee between the parties.

                                           Further pleaded that the workman - Padam Singh was

                            neither appointed by the Management (HUDA), nor the salary was

                            disbursed to him by HUDA, at any point of time.

                                           Annual contract of maintenance and operation of Sewer

                            Cleaning Machine was given to M/s Amtech Enviro Engineering

                            Services, A-287, Govindpuram, Ghaziabad, and as per condition No.10

                            of the contract agreement, said service agency had to provide workmen to

                            the Management (HUDA).

                                           Further, termination of Padam Singh (workman) from the

                            services on 22.11.2008 on verbal orders is also denied.

LAVISHA
2024.05.14 15:43
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
                             9.           After completion of pleadings of the parties, four issues

                            were framed by learned Labour Court, vide order dated 13.08.2013,

                            which are reproduced here under:-

                                               "1.    Whether the termination of workman Padam
                                               Singh is justified or not, if not, the to what relief he is
                                               entitled to? OPW
                                               2.     Whether there exist no relationship of employee
                                               and employer between the parties? OPR
                                               3.     Whether     the    present    reference    is   not
                                               maintainable in the present form. OPR
                                               4.     Relief."


                            10.          While deciding the industrial dispute raised by the workman

                            - Padam Singh, under Reference No.315 of 2012, under Section 10 (1)

                            (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, learned Labour Court

                            categorically held that workman was working with the Management as a

                            'Cleaner' on the said Sewer Cleaning Machine from the month of

                            February, 2002 till 22.11.2008 and his abrupt removal from the services

                            is in complete violation of Section 25-F of the Act.

                                         Learned Labour Court observed that photocopies of the Log

                            Books of Sewer Cleaning Machine bearing registration No.HR

                            38-E/2117 as Mark - A1 (running into pages 1-229) and Mark - B1

                            (running into pages 1-148) clearly reveals that Padam Singh (workman)

                            had worked with the Management (HUDA), and before reaching to the

                            said conclusion, learned Labour Court has already noticed that the said

                            Log Books were duly certified by Sub Divisional Engineer of the

                            Manaagement - HUDA and nobody had questioned the authenticity of

                            the Log Books, at any stage.
LAVISHA
2024.05.14 15:43
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh
                                         Moreover, the stand taken by the Management (HUDA) has

                            not been proved by way of substantial evidence.

                                        One official namely Sobhan Singh, working as Assistant in

                            the HUDA, Sub Division No.1, Faridabad, has placed on record the

                            copies of AMCs as Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-4, for the period commencing from

                            10.11.2009, onwards. Said documentary evidence is of no use for

                            deciding the industrial dispute because the relevant period during which

                            the workman was working with the Management, is from February, 2002

                            to 22.11.2008.

                                        Even, in the case of workman namely Sunder (petitioner in

                            CWP-17990-2017), relevant service period is January, 2008 to July,

                            2012.

                                        And in the case of workman namely Laxman (petitioner in

                            CWP-17988-2017), relevant service period is January, 2002 to

                            November, 2008.

                            11.         Therefore, for the relevant period, no authentic documentary

                            evidence has been placed on record by the Management (HUDA).

                            12.         This Court even looks the issue from a different angle also,

                            that if the defence taken by the HUDA-Management was true and

                            correct, there was nothing to stop them to implead the said agency i.e.

                            M/s Amtech Enviro Engineering Services, as party - respondent.

Even, no document regarding the licence authorizing such private agency to provide contractual workmen or even document of agreement etc. has been brought on record for the period concerned. LAVISHA 2024.05.14 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

13. Therefore, this Court does not find any substance in the writ petitions filed by the Management (HUDA), rather, finds that the award passed by learned Labour Court is worth to be maintained.

14. Accordingly, writ petitions filed by the Management (HUDA) (CWP-29535-2017, CWP-29525-2017 and CWP-29754-2017) are hereby dismissed.

15. Now, taking up the writ petitions filed by the workman(s) i.e. CWP-17706-2017, CWP-17988-2017 and CWP-17990-2017, this Court has noticed that the dispute pertains to the period of more than 15 years back and no purpose would be served by ordering their reinstatement in service.

Probably, workman(s) may have crossed the age of superannuation also.

Therefore, it would be appropriate to enhance the one time lump sum amount of compensation from the amount whatever has been awarded by learned Labour Court.

16. For the said purpose, this Court is guided by LAVISHA 2024.05.14 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

18. Therefore, considering the total length of the services rendered by Padam Singh (in CWP-17706-2017), Sunder (in CWP-17990-2017) and Laxman (in CWP-17988-2017), this Court deems it appropriate to award LAVISHA 2024.05.14 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh lump sum amount of compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lacs Only to each of the workman), which would include the amount already awarded by learned Labour Court.

19. Therefore, while maintaining the award(s) under challenge before this Court in all the six writ petitions, same are modified to the extent of awarding of amount of compensation i.e. all the three workman would be entitled to receive lump sum amount of compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lacs only), towards all the claims raised by them through their demand notice.

20. Respondent - Management (HUDA) is directed to pay the said compensation amount of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lacs to each workman), within a period of three months from today i.e. on or before 12.08.2024.

21. In case, amount ordered by this Court is not deposited and informed to the workmen, within the stipulated period, Management - HUDA/HSVP would be liable to pay the amount along with interest @ 6% p.a., from the date of decision passed by this Court.

22. Hence, award in the writ petitions filed by the workmen are modified by enhancing compensation amount.

23. Accordingly, all the six writ petitions stand disposed of. 24.

  LAVISHA 2024.05.14 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh