Gurjit Singh v. Industrial Tribunal, Patiala And ANR.





 
 


!

"
#
 $


 #










#%&
'(
#&)'*
+ ,+ ,

-./%
012
++++++ 33&44% 5+ + -%.4
.6-47
%4

'%2&.







+++++++++&3'&%  * 8"

+
!

0 +0+
0 #

8"

0+
!

0



:


!

  

  

   

  

 


:


!

7
!+ 



 

     



!

##



$ %

 

 

&

& 

  &

 &

    

( )&



 %



!

##

'

  

 *  

+



,%   -.



(0
1#23!4 

-./%
012
;+ -%.4
.6-47
%4

'%2&.

'



 

%   !5!1!4 +6&
4.

$&



+



,7 -.



  

8 49!!!:

8 !!!!!:

'&   



 '





 

  

%   !4!94##9



&



    



&

&



 '



   +



, -.

  

!4!94##9

 &



 ' '

&

&

 & & < % &

  

" 

&

 )&

 &

 '

  1!

 4   

&  

 

05 04!

 &

'

1!

4    !;44### ='

 

 9>

$&

?

&  4#13 +



,

4#13.

& 

&  

< -' 6 ( &

0&).&%.<7 0%%&
'(
:.%=
;+
>
#&;

'%2&. !!;

+.

**/ 3 +(.

,

.<
0%%&
4&)%.')
#&;&4'3>&%
'.3'.%'
%+
5+ > !!;

+.

**/ +(.

  

8 49!!!:

 % "

 &  ' & 

4#13 5



(0
1#23!4

 &"





  )&

'



 % 



1 '

  

"



< 

&&

 

 

   



' 

   

% 



  

8 49!!!:

8 !!!!!:

9  

6

"&  



%   A  &  544!!4#  



; 0

  





 &"



  )&

'

" &

 '

&

 <

"

  



"

&

 & 

&

  



 

"

 '

 

&

 

 

?

3 0



&' 

& '   







!4!94##9



& 

"

 



 %  &  ' & 

4#13

2 0

"

"

 

 ' 

"



' 

%



 

 



9>

  

 9>



4#13      





&

'



 

& "25F. Conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen.- No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until-- (a) the workman has been given one month' s notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice: (b)the workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days' average pay for every completed year of continuous service] or any part thereof in excess of six months; and



(c) notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government [or such authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette]."

#







 



  

  



 



 "

& '

 %  

%  

 & 

"

 

< -' >&



Municipal Council, Dina Nagar, Tehsil & District Gurdaspur vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur and another 2014 (4) SCT 514, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant is not entitled for reinstatement with full back wages and he has been rightly awarded the compensation amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/- by the learned Single Judge.

10.

No interference is called for in the findings arrived at by the learned Single Judge.

11.

With regard to the quantum of compensation, we take reference from the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Management, Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd. vs. Ghanshyam Sharma 2018 (18) SCC 80, wherein for a period of 01 year, compensation of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded and in K.V.Anil Mithra and another vs. Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit and another 2021 (4) S.C.T. 415, while noticing the service of the retrenched employee for a period of 04 years, lump sum monitory compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- was awarded to the workman. 12.

Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.

@

   &

 

   

+0+
0 # 


:


!






!

#

!

#

.)2
7
 ,  

B  8  '