MANAGEMENT OF CANARA BANK, H R M SECTION CIRCLE OFFICE, CHANDIGARH Vs. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II, CHANDIGARH, AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Written statement on behalf of respondent No. 2-workman filed in the Court today, is taken on record.

(2.) In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the award dated 04.06.2007 (Annexure-P-4), passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Chandigarh, vide which the reference has been answered in favour of the respondent No. 2-workman holding him entitled to reinstatement in service with 50% back wages alongwith interest @ 9% per annum.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner-management contends that the respondent No. 2- workman was appointed as a Coolie on casual basis and his services were terminated when his services were no more required. He contends that even if the findings as recorded by the Labour Court, are taken to be correct, he had merely worked for almost three years with the petitioner-management and since the post on which he had been ordered to be reinstated in service was a public post which was not filled up as per statutory rules governing the service, and therefore, was not in consonance with the scheme and his appointment on public post was not as per the provisions of the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, the respondent No. 2-workman cannot be held to be reinstated in service. He further contends at the most for the termination of his service in violation of Industrial Disputes Act, the respondent No. 2- workman would be entitled to compensation as per the Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Telecom District Manager and Others v. Kesheb Deb,2008 4 SCT 33 , and the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Ishwar Singh and another, 2008 3 SCT 788 .