High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/18353/2013disposed of

Jaspal Singh v. Presiding Officer Indu. Tribunal Patiala And ORS

2015-08-21Mr. Justice R.P. Nagrath2 pages

VINOD KUMAR 2015.08.24 15:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.18353 of 2013 [ 1 ] *****

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.18353 of 2013 Date of decision:21.08.2015 Jaspal Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Patiala and others ...Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

Present:

Mr. P.S.Bhangu, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Anant Kataria, DAG, Punjab.

***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

This order shall dispose of four writ petitions bearing CWP Nos.18353, 18361, 18362 and 24051 of 2013 as all are inter-connected. However, the facts are being extracted from CWP No.18353 of 2013. All the four writ petitions have been filed by the workmen aggrieved against the issue of relief decided by the Labour Court. The petitioner(s) have been only awarded compensation, that too inadequate according to them, instead of reinstatement and back wages. During the course of hearing, counsel for the petitioner(s) restricted his argument to the inadequacy of the compensation and has submitted that the petitioner(s) had joined the service in the years 19981999, which was terminated on 05.09.2002. The compensation, thus, assessed @ `15,000/- for that period is highly inadequate and has relied

VINOD KUMAR 2015.08.24 15:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.18353 of 2013 [ 2 ] ***** upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation etc. vs. Jadeja Govubha Chhanubha and another, 2015 AIR(SC) 609, wherein the Supreme Court has awarded compensation, in lieu of reinstatement, to the tune of `2,50,000/- to the workman who had worked for 18 months.

However, counsel for the respondents could not cite any judgment to the contrary.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering all the facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner(s) are entitled to compensation of `2,50,000/- in all the four cases separately, in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation's case (supra) and hence, the respondents are directed to pay the compensation of `2,50,000/-to the petitioner(s). With these observations, all the four writ petitions are disposed of.

August 21, 2015 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge