Punjab-Haryana High Court
Haryana Agro Ind. Corp vs Presiding Officer, Industrial ... on 23 October, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138714
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision: 23.10.2024
CWP No.7268 of 1998(O&M)
Haryana Agro Industries Corporation
....Petitioner
vs.
The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Rohtak
and another
....Respondents
CWP No.10676 of 2001(O&M)
Jai Narain
....Petitioner
vs.
The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Rohtak
and another
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present: Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP-7268 of 1998
for respondent No. 2 in CWP- 10676 of 2001
Mr. Ashok K.Sharma (Bhana), Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP-10676 of 2001
for respondent No. 2 in CWP- 7268 of 1998
***
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)
1. By this common order, CWP No. 7268 of 1998 and CWP No.
10676 of 2001 are hereby adjudicated as common questions of law and facts
are involved. With the consent of both sides, facts are borrowed from CWP
No. 7268 of 1998.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138714
2. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of
the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of award dated 12.01.1998
(Annexure P-4) whereby Labour Court has answered the reference in favour
of workman.
3. The Management is claiming that workman was wrongly
ordered to be reinstated with 25% back wages and workman is claiming that
he should be paid full back wages instead of 25%.
4. Concededly, the workman has passed away and he had worked
with Management during August'1991 to March'1992. The workman is
claiming that he had completed 240 days and Management is disputing the
said fact. On account of death of workman, the question of reinstatement
does not survive. The Management has complied with mandate of Section
17-B of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short "1947 Act") during the
pendency of instant petition. The workman at one stage was claiming
enhancement of back wages and his application was dismissed by order
dated 03.02.2000 passed by this Court.
5. The question which remains pending is whether workman is
entitled to back wages as ordered by Tribunal.
6. Keeping in mind paras 50-52 of judgment of Supreme Court in
Central Council for Research in Ayurvedic Sciences and another v.
Bikartan Das and others, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 996 and to put the
litigation to rest, this Court considering the length of service and last drawn
pay of the workman; efflux of time; payment of wages to workman in terms
of Section 17-B of 1947 Act and directions of Tribunal, deems it appropriate
to direct the Management to pay a sum of ₹ 60,000/-as lumpsum payment to
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:138714
legal representative(s) of the workman towards back wages. Let the needful
be done within 3 months from today.
7. In view of the above facts and findings, the petitions stand
disposed of.
8. Pending Misc. application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
JUDGE
23.10.2024
paramjit
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No
3 of 3
