Harbhajan Singh vs Pepsu Road Transport Corporation And ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 19603 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Harbhajan Singh vs Pepsu Road Transport Corporation And ... on 6 November, 2024

                                         Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144236




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

119                                              CWP-29827-2024
                                                 Date of decision: 06.11.2024

HARBHAJAN SINGH                                              ....PETITIONER
                                  Vs.
PEPSU ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ORS
                                                             ...RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present:       Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate
               for the petitioner.

               Mr. Rakesh Roy, Advocate for
               Mr. Abhilaksh Gaind, Advocate
               for the respondents (through V.C.).

                     ****

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J (ORAL)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the

Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of impugned Award dated

23.08.2022 (Annexure P-10) whereby Labour Court has answered the reference

against him.

2. The petitioner was working with respondent as Conductor and was

subjected to punishment of stoppage of two increments vide order dated

18.02.1980 (Annexure P-1). There was allegation against him that he has

defrauded the Corporation to the tune of Rs.19.60. The petitioner served demand

notice on 16.10.2001 (Annexure P-5) i.e. after the expiry of more than 20 years

from the date of order of punishment. The matter came to be referred to Labour

Court which by impugned Award dated 23.08.2022 (Annexure P-10) has

answered the reference against the petitioner.

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144236

3. The petitioner was concededly subjected to punishment vide order

dated 18.02.1980 and he served demand notice on 16.10.2001 i.e. after the

expiry of more than 20 years from the date of order of punishment. The Labour

Court has dismissed claim of the petitioner on various grounds including ground

of limitation. The Court has opined that demand notice was served after a

considerable period of time and there is no explanation for delay.

4. On being confronted with judgment dated 18.10.2024 passed by

this Court in CWP No.18118 of 2006 titled as 'Punjab and Sind Bank Vs. Jai

Singh and others', Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioner expressed his

inability to distinguish the instant case from the findings recorded in the said

judgment.

5. Dismissed.

06.11.2024                                    [JAGMOHAN BANSAL]
manoj                                             JUDGE

                   Whether speaking/reasoned         Yes/No
                   Whether reportable                Yes/No




                                     2 of 2