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.
authenticity of this order/judgment
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
authenticity of this order/judgment
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
authenticity of this order/judgment
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.
authenticity of this order/judgment
