SUKHWINDER KAUR Vs. PUNJAB ROADWAYS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been directed against the Award of the Labour Court dated June 1, 1993 vide which the workman was ordered to be re-instated but without back-wages. The only reason which has been mentioned in the award while declining back wages is that the workman was guilty of sending the demand notice late.

(2.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the finding is un-sustainable. Admittedly, services of the workman were dispensed with on August 31, 1983 and he served demand notice on February 21, 1984. In view thereof, there is hardly any delay on the part of the workman in sending the demand notice. The time taken by the Government in making reference which is of about seven years, can be an obstacle in the way of the workman because he cannot be blamed for this delay. The workman has died after passing of the Award. In view of erroneous approach, this Court is left with no other option but to allow this petitioner to the grant of back-wages from February 21, 1984 till the date of death of the workman, At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents submits before us that petitioners have not proved themselves to be legal representatives of deceased -workman. They have averred in paragraph I of the writ petition that they are legal heirs of Harjit Singh deceased. This paragraph has been denied for want of knowledge. However, if respondent No. 1 brings positive evidence before this court in order to disprove that petitioners are legal heirs of deceased workman, an application can be filed for review of this order. Let the payment be made within three months from today. Parties arc, however, left to bear their own costs.