Raj Kumar vs Presiding Officer, Industrial ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 8473 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Raj Kumar vs Presiding Officer, Industrial ... on 22 April, 2024

Author: Deepak Sibal

Bench: Deepak Sibal

LPA-964-2024 (O&M) -1- 2024: PHHC:053833-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH
111 LPA-964-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 22.04.2024
RAJ KUMAR
.. Appellant
VERSUS

THE PRESIDING OFFICER AND OTHERS

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Present: Mr. Ripudaman Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the appellant.

ie 2 2Ie 34

DEEPAK SIBAL, J.(QRAL)

(1) The present intra Court appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16.12.2023 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court disposing of the appellant's petition by enhancing the compensation awarded to him by the Industrial Tribunal, Patiala (for short -- the Tribunal) from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.2,00,000/-.

(2) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that after the illegal termination of the appellant's services had been established the learned Single Judge erred in only enhancing the compensation awarded to the appellant by the Tribunal and not reinstating him.

(3) A perusal of the impugned judgment reveals that before the learned Single Judge, after having argued the matter on its merits, learned

wsya counsel appearing for the appellant had confined his prayer only to the

2024.04.25 14:08 | attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

LPA-964-2024 (O&M) -2- 2024: PHHC:053833-DB

enhancement of compensation awarded to the appellant by the Tribunal. Thus, the prayer for the appellant's reinstatement had been given up. In this regard, para 11 of the judgment of the learned Single Judge reads as under:-

"11, After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only with regard to enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal below by submitting that the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal below is on the lower side."

(4) In light of the above, the prayer for reinstatement made before

us is rejected.

(5) Dismissed.

(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE April 22, 2024 Nisha Yadav Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No

Whether reportable? Yes/No

NISHA

2024.04.25 14:08

| attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.