SECRETARY TO GOVT OF PUNJAB, DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION, CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER Vs. VINOD KUMAR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present writ petition has been preferred by Government of Punjab through the Secretary, Irrigation Department (hereinafter referred to as, 'the management') against Vinod Kumar respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the workman'). The State of Punjab has assailed the order dated 9th May, 2007 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Amritsar, whereby under Section 33C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'), he has held that the workman is entitled to balance amount of back wages amounting to Rs. 2,17,381/- within a period of three months from the date of pronouncement of the order, failing which, the workman has been further held entitled to claim the aforesaid amount with interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum till actual payment of the amount is made.

(2.) It is an admitted fact that the workman, whose services were terminated, was ordered to be reinstated with 50 percent back wages, vide award (Annexure P-2) dated 6th November, 1997. The award (Annexure P-2) has attained finality between the parties and has been affirmed by the higher courts.

(3.) The workman Vinod Kumar respondent No. 1 was appointed as Silt Observer by the management on 16th March, 1977. His services were terminated on 15th February, 1983. This fact has been gathered from the award (Annexure P-2). The management had reinstated the applicant on 13th June, 2001 on the direction of this Court in CM No. 706 of 2000 in Civil Writ Petition No. 18329 of 1990. Applicant was paid half wages from 05.07.1982 to 26.07.1998 and full wages from 27.07.1998 to 13.06.2001. By filing the application under Section 33C (2) of the Act, the workman demanded difference of amount of back wages as a result of increments, Dearness Allowance admissible to him during the period of July 1982 to 31.05.2001 and also House Rent Allowance. This amount was being denied to the applicant on the ground that he had not served the Department from 05.07.1982 to 31.05.2001. After noticing the contention of the parties, Labour Court observed as under :