High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/9455/2004disposed of

Pepsu Road Transport Corporation. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court & ANR.

2024-04-16Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth7 pages

! "#$"%&'&(&#)&&& &( !&#

( *(+ ,

-'. #/%"0 0&%&)1&0 0 % #&' ()& $*+&,-# % .& $*+&&$ %/ (&'& $*+& , #$ 00000 0&%&)1&0 02%/

1#-& 2,)$23-%&&('4 #

&$ & # #& &(& - &1&$ $&$ 567 48#&

$23)&$!&2 1-23 ,+ , 99: ,)$ $ + 68 6+8 , - $

&) # + 9;6, -<-+,9;=8 -& 2 & 1$,&* , #$4>?'& - 1-) &$'( - 1 # ;-&$ &3$#&,-'# ($&1&$

2@+- #* , +;",-+,9; 5 % .& + )# ( #$4 1?'&# -&-'# ($&1&$ $&$5&$

''$&)3-&, #4%&&('-&$#&

$&$ $&$67 A8 1-231?'&1& &$ - *++'#)&+-&1&$1-+ 3, *+ &$ &)&31& &) ,7$&,+ (- & &)+' $ ( - #$ , - '& )3 - - 1?'& 1&

$+)&$2$5&++ ,&&(-&(,

#& &,B:3& - &? , +*+ $ $&$

#$ +$-2)1 '

Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Bathinda Depot.

No.194/Admn. Dated 11.06.04

ORDER

In compliance with the award dated 24.03.04 passed by the Hon'ble Presiding Officer, Labour Court Patiala termination order No. 555 Dated 22.07.92 of Sh. Amarjit Singh, Driver No. 594A is hereby cancelled. He is reinstated in service in the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation with immediate effect. After granting him continuity of service and after counting his annual increments for the period of termination, his salary is 'being fixed but he will not be entitled for any back wages for the period of termination.

Sh. Amarjit Singh, Driver No. 59 A who had attained the age of 58 Years on 14.12.2001 is relieved from service of the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation w.e.f 31.12.2001.

Endst. No: 1309 / Admn Sd/4 General Manager, P.R.T.C Bathinda.

Dated:'

''$&)3-&, :&-$1&

$,1-$&1&),-&)$$&$ - &?,+*+ -$$&$:67 A8 #$ +$-2)1 '

Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Bathinda Depot.

No.194/Admn. Dated 11.06.04

ORDER

Order No. 194 / Admn Dated 11.06.2004 of this office passed in respect of Sh. Amarjit Singh Driver No. 59 4 A in compliance with the award dated 24.03.04 passed by the Hon'ble Presiding Officer, Labour Court Patiala is hereby withdrawn with immediate effect because the competent authority regarding the appointment of this employee is the Hon'ble Managing Director, P.R.T.C Patiala.

Sd/4 General Manager, P.R.T.C Bathinda.

Endst. No: 1441 / Admn Dated: 18.06.04' -

% .& )&$+ ), #$ 41?'&

2' -&23++&)(2--&,'$ $ #4%&&('

++$$2&(-$,

&3,#&,-'# ($&1&$$&$5 B !&$+ ), #$, -

2' -& *-#* , +;4",-+,9;1* +'#)$1- $ (-#$+3,-# 1# - &( )&$+ ),-#& -&*&($ &$$

-' ,-+& , $ # &) ; ",,&+ &)'&7,-+& -& #$4 '&@ (-61?'&8& $&$

&)$ # $ + 6868,-+,9;&(& -$,- '&,'

*+ &$ &' 1& ,1&$$ - $

&) 2 &)4+ '4 !&2 &&)&& ,+,99: : ,7&'(-+$ )&$2 &)+$$

,$( -&1?'&'&$&2 & - $)3,&#$, -'- 2 --& $$- & ,&+3 *+,53&

-%&&('6#-8++$()3 23 (& $ - '& $ )&$ !&2 &$ -' 1- + 3, *+ -1* -(1& (&$1&$ -2&+?

1&( -7#)&&(&$-&2 +,'$ 3-& 2 (*23-1?'&$ (#+$( -&- 1,1&

)3 ))&$-, -1& )?(&,- 9 &+& 1--#-& &$'$- &2 + ,'-,,+#4%&&(' 2 &$&2 +-& 2 &2 $-& ,))

,- 1,!&$+ ), #$41?'&) #-$$&$9;;

$23-* 2+-,- #&

$> 4:9:4 )$& <Pepsu Road Transport Corporation and another Vs. Presiding oFficer, Labour Court and another' &$

2' -& &)' ')&++ '

&+ - *+#$,& $3&

1& + $$ 23 - !&2 C & - $* 1- 1&

'#)3$ 1-

&$ & # #& 6 &' +#&8 1--& ,- &2 +1& - 1))

>-)&?(,-@ $(' ,-D=2)#7 )$& 'Hussaini Vs. The Hon. The Chief Justice of High Court of Judicature at Allahabd and others, AIR 1985 SC 75' &$ 'Ex. Const. Ranbir Singh No.323/SPT Vs. The State of Haryana and others, 1999(1) RSJ 527= D=2)* ,- &($ 1--*1,-!&2 &$-

#-)$-& &$,

$ '

&),' *+ -'#)3'&32&?-&*$&$ 2#&$&)2, & # ) - &? , +*+ $ $&$ 9;; #&

$23-* 2+-,- #$ +$- 2)1 'CORAM:4 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMAB

Present:

Mr. S.P. Garg, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Sonia G. Singh, Advocate for respondents.

ORDER:

This petition challenges award of the Labour Court, directing the petitioners to release the retrial benefits to respondent No.24 workman by treating his period of absence as period of leave without pay Dispute was referred to the Labour Court at the instance of the workman. Claim of the workman was that he was appointed as Driver with the petitioners in the year 1978 and his services were terminated on 15.4.1999 without holding any proper inquiry.

Management took the plea that the workman absented from 28.5.1998 and after ex4parte inquiry, his services were terminated vide order dated 15.4. 1999, The Labour Court held that the allegation of willful absence of the workman after 28.5.1998 was duly proved, but since he was suffering from a serious ailment and had already attained the age of retirement, he was entitled to reinstatement without any backwages. As a result of reinstatement, he will be entitled to retirement benefits as per rules.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that once the workrnan was willfully absent, the Labour Court was not justified in holding that the workman was entitled to any benefit.

Learned counsel for the respondent4 workman, however, submitted that the workman had already rendered 21 years of service and had become eligible for retirement benefits. Reliance was placed on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Hussaini v. The Hon. The Chief Justice of High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and others AIR 1985 SC 75 and a judgment of this Court in Ex.Const. Ran bir Singh No.323/SPT v. The State of Haryana and others 1999(1) RSJ 527 Even though the reasoning given by the Labour Court for holding that the workman was entitled to reinstatement, may be open to doubt, but even without going into the said question, we find that the workman had already rendered 21 years of service and was suffering from serious ailment on account of which he was absented. In these circumstances, the view taken by the Labour Court that instead of dismissal from service, he may be taken to have retired and paid retirement benefits as per rules, cannot be held to be suffering from any patent error so as to call for interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The petition is dismissed.

July 09, 2007 sd/4Adarsh Kumar Goel Judge Sd/4 Ajai Lamba Judge'

,-*1#&?23-D=2)* "+-

'&$&##)+&2)-,&+ &$++ '

&+ ,-# +& - &( '

2'$ 23 + ) , - 1?'& & ,,$ 2+&

# +& &) -#)&&?23-1?'& -&-

1, 1&

,,( ,'

&)' &$ , -& & - &2 $,'-$ 3 &) &$'$# -# +& -&1?'&@$& *1-

;99&$&, -)$(&$#&'&)C 3 -1& '&$,' *+ ;99-

-1?'&-&$$$53& , *+ -%&&('&$- -(+$$+&&3?$, +'#)&,' +$ +&(& -1?'&$ (- &$#$

;

++$()3 -# 1# 34&$- '# ($&1&$ '$,$-7-&-$,'& $&$ ;99 1 )$ 2 + $$ & ,,+* &$ - #4%&&('1 )$#&

&, -$ 23+ $(- 1?'&2+'# ) )3$&,$(- *+,5 3& ++$()3 &))-&)2, &*&)&2)-'&

#- ) 1 )$&) 27$$ 1- &3 +

&3$)&3 50&%&)1&0 06 #) %"(!

rashmi >-- #&?(A& $ 3 A >--#&2)E 3 A