STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. KULWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Punjab has filed these three writ petitions to challenge the awards dated June 20, 1988 given by the Labour Court by which it was held that the workmen are entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. It is alleged that the workmen had filed separate suits in the Court of Subordinate Judge, 1st Class, Patiala which had been dismissed. In spite of that, the Labour Court had given ex-parte awards and ordered the reinstatement of the workmen. It is prayed that the award be quashed.

(2.) On behalf of the respondents, it has been pointed out that they had filed civil suits to challenge the respective orders of termination passed against them. The suits were initially dismissed by the learned trial Court. Subsequently, the appeals filed by the workmen were allowed. Mr. G.C. Gupta, counsel for the respondent-workmen has produced photo copies of these documents. In C.W.P. No. 9213 of 1988, Mr. S.K. Chopra, Additional District Judge, Patiala, accepted the appeal filed by the workmen vide his judgment dated August 23, 1988. Photocopies of the judgment and the decree are taken on record as Mark 'A'. Similarly, in CWP No. 9215 of 1988 the appeal filed by the respondent-workman, Surmukh Singh was allowed by Mr. S.K. Chopra, Additional District Judge, Patiala vide his judgment dated November 25, 1988. Photocopies of the judgment and decree are placed on the record as Mark 'B'. In CWP No. 9216 of 1988, the appeal filed by the workman was allowed by Mr. S.S. Grewal, Additional District Judge, Patiala vide his judgment dated January 22, 1993. Photocopies of the Judgment and decree are taken on record as Mark 'C'.

(3.) In view of the above, the primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioners does not survive. Still further, it has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent-workmen that they were reinstated in service by the petitioners on November 14, 1995. They are continuing in service except in case of Rajinder Pal (CWP No. 9216/88) who had expired in August, 1996. Since the petitioners have reinstated the workmen, it would be unjust and unfair to now render them jobless. In addition to all this, Mr. G.C. Gupta states that the workmen in CWP Nos. 9213 and 9215 of 1988 relinquish their claim for payment of back wages in entirety subject to the conditions that they are paid full wages from the date they have been reinstated in November 1995. In case of CWP No. 9216 of 1988, learned counsel submits that the workman having expired, his family should be provided with some reasonable compensation so that they can subsist.