DHOOP SINGH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, AMBALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in the present petition is to the denial of back wages vide award dated 25.03.1992 (Annexure P -1) while the benefit of reinstatement was given. The Labour Court, vide the award in question, came to the conclusion that the petitioner's services were abruptly terminated on 18.10.1985 and he had been appointed as a Clerk on 19.01.1984. A demand notice dated 14.08.1987 was also served stating that the principle of last come first go was not adopted. The claim of the management that workman was appointed on the post of clerk with a stipulation to pass the type test was rejected on the ground that the advertisement dated 11.07.1982 never prescribed for such stipulation.

(2.) THE condition was inserted in the appointment letter later and the services of the workman could not be terminated on that account and accordingly, reinstatement was directed. On the issue of back wages, reliance was placed upon the award passed in Vijay Pal Singh vs. Haryana State Co -operative Land Development Bank Ltd., Chandigarh, which is also the present management. It was noticed that no relief was given and even in Gurdial Singh vs. Haryana State Co -operative Land Development Bank Ltd., relief was not granted. Eventually, the Apex Court, vide order dated 04.12.1990, directed that employment would be given from 01.01.1991 without any arrears of salary from the date of removal. Accordingly, the relief of back wages was also denied to the workman. The relevant paragraphs read as under: -

(3.) IT is not disputed that the matter in similar to the present one and that order should govern the present case also. Accordingly, the order under appeal in set -aside; the writ petition in the High Court allowed and the Respondent is directed to take appellant on reemployment from 1 -3 -1991 in the same post which he held prior to his removal. However, appellant would not be entitled to claim any arrears of salary from the date of removal till the date of re -employment. In other respects, the appellant shall be treated at par with other employees who have now been reinstated. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.