Single judge set aside the Industrial Tribunal award and granted relief to a workman whose service continuity was disputed due to missing muster rolls, ordering reinstatement with back wages.
The award dated 11.11.2008 was set aside. Petitioner entitled to reinstatement, continuity of service, and 50% back wages.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP No. 12971 of 2009 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
203
CWP No. 12971 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 09.08.2016
Bharti
................Petitioner
vs.
The Presiding Officer and another .................Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri
Present: Mr. Diwan S. Adlakha, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Deepender Ahlawat, Advocate for respondent No.2
P.B. Bajanthri, J. (Oral)
The petitioner has assailed the award dated 11.11.2008 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Circle-I, Faridabad.
Banita Chugh 2016.08.11 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh
CWP No. 12971 of 2009 (O&M) -2-
“ (i) Whether the services of Bharti, workman
were terminated illegally? If so, to what relief he is entitled? OPW
(ii) Whether MCF does not fall under the definition of industry? If so, to what effect? OPR (iii) Whether the reference is not maintainable? OPR
(iv) Relief.”
Banita Chugh 2016.08.11 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh
CWP No. 12971 of 2009 (O&M) -3-
( P.B. Bajanthri ) 09.08.2016 Judge chugh
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No
Banita Chugh 2016.08.11 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned award of the Industrial Tribunal should be set aside and the petitioner reinstated given the evidentiary gaps regarding service continuity.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement, continuity of service, and back wages.
Bharti
The Presiding Officer
P.B. Bajanthri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
