Disposed¶25

The M.D. Director Punjab Dairy v. Presiding Officer

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Jul 2026CWP/1181/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab Dairy management vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Amritsar; termination of workman Ajit Singh in 1970; Government reference order 13.03.1989; writ petition No. 6277 of 1989 disposed as infructuous; Labour Court award 14.03.2000 holding termination bad in law; workman deemed in employment till death (01.01.1993) or retirement; back wages from 11.05.1989 to 01.01.1993 paid to legal heirs; claim for back wages 06.10.1970 to 11.05.1989 left open; petition disposed of with liberty to revive; CWP-1181-2001; Kirti Singh J.; decided 21.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of at this stage; back-wages claim for 06.10.1970 to 11.05.1989 left open and not adjudicated; liberty granted to the private respondents to revive the petition if the need so arises. ¶25

The M.D. Director Punjab Dairy Vs Presiding Officer — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the workman (now his legal heirs) is entitled to back wages from 11.05.1989 till the date of his death (01.01.1993) or date of retirement, whichever is earlier. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

By its order dated 01.12.2016, this Court held the workman entitled to back wages from 11.05.1989 (date of filing of writ petition No.6277 of 1989) till the date of his death (01.01.1993) or date of retirement, whichever is earlier, and directed verification of payment to the LRs.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Entitlement to back wages for the period from 06.10.1970 to 11.05.1989 is left open and is not adjudicated upon.

¶25

Key takeaways

The writ petition is disposed of at this stage due to lack of instructions from counsel for respondents No.2, 4 & 9, with liberty granted to the private respondents to revive the petition if the need so arises.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CWP-1181-2001 (Kirti Singh, J.): Management's (M.D./Director, Punjab Dairy) writ petition concerning the Labour Court award dated 14.03.2000, which held the 1970 termination of workman Ajit Singh bad in law and deemed him in employment till death or retirement, whichever earlier. By interim order dated 01.12.2016 this Court restricted back wages to the period from 11.05.1989 (filing of writ petition No. 6277 of 1989) till the workman's death (01.01.1993) or retirement, whichever earlier; on 20.11.2025 petitioners' counsel confirmed those back wages had been paid to the legal heirs. The sole surviving claim — back wages for 06.10.1970 to 11.05.1989 — was not adjudicated for want of instructions from respondents No.2, 4 & 9; the petition was disposed of with that issue expressly left open and liberty granted to the private respondents to revive the petition.

¶1

211

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP-1181-2001 Decided on : July 21, 2026

¶4

THE M.D. DIRECTOR PUNJAB DAIRY AND ANOTHER

¶5

. . . Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, AMRITSAR AND OTHERS . . . Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH

¶9

Present: Mr. Bikramjit Singh Patwalia, Advocate with Mr. Gaurav Jagota, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶10

Mr. Vipul Aggarwal, Advocate for respondents No.2, 4 & 9.

¶11

¶12

KIRTI SINGH, J. (Oral)

¶13

The following order was passed on 01.12.2016:-

¶14

“Ajit Singh-workman had been employed by the petitioner but his services were terminated in the year 1970. He wanted to challenge the termination his service by getting the matter referred by the Government to the Labour Court, however, that was not accepted by the Government which led him to file a writ petition No. 6277 of 1989 with prayer to get the matter referred to the Labour Court. When that writ petition had come up for hearing on 01.11.1989, a statement was made before the Bench by the respondent-State counsel that the matter had since been referred to the Labour Court. Therefore a writ petition was disposed of as infrucutous.

¶15

The matter was referred to the Labour Court vide the Government order dated 13th March, 1989. During the pendency of the proceedings before the Labour Court, Ajit Singh died on 01.01.1993. His LRs were brought on record who are now the private respondents in the writ petition. The Labour Court vide award dated 14.03.2000 held the termination of the services of Ajit Singh to be bad in law and answered the reference in favour of the workman by observing that the workman will be deemed to be in employment till his death or till his date of retirement whichever was earlier.

¶16

The management filed the present writ petition. The motion bench only

¶17

RITIKA 2026.07.22 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

(211)

¶19

-2

¶20

issued notice qua the back wages and meanwhile stayed the payment of back wages prior to filing of the writ petition No.6277 of 1989. That writ petition was filed on 11.05.1989. In other words, the workman is entitled to the back wages from 11.05.1989 till the date of his death/retirement whichever was earlier. Let the petitioner counsel now find out whether the LRs have been paid the back wages of workman Ajit Singh from 11.05.1989 till his date of death i.e. 01.01.1993 or the date of his retirement whichever is earlier.

¶21

Adjourned to 25.01.2017.

¶22

Copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the parties.”

¶23

Thereafter, on 20.11.2025, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners informed this Court that the back wages payable for the period from 11.05.1989 till the date of death of the workman, i.e. 01.01.1993, had already been paid to the legal heirs of deceased-workman. It was further submitted that the only issue surviving for adjudication pertains to the claim of back wages for the period from 06.10.1970 to 11.05.1989.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No. 2, 4 and 9 submits that he has not been able to establish communication with the private respondents concerned.

¶25

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and due to the lack of instructions pleaded by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.2, 4 & 9, the present writ petition is disposed of, at this stage. However, the issue pertaining to entitlement of back wages for the period from 06.10.1970 to 11.05.1989 is left open and is not adjudicated upon. Liberty is granted to the private respondents to revive the present petition, if the need so arises.

¶26

July 21, 2026

¶27

(KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE

¶28

Ritika

¶29

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶30

RITIKA 2026.07.22 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

The M.D. Director Punjab Dairy v. Presiding Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The M.D. Director Punjab Dairy v. Presiding Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sahib Singh Vs Polc Patiala and Ors.

K.P.Singh Vs Presiding Officer,Labour Court Bathinda

O.I./Head Central Soil & Water Instt.Chd Vs Appellate Auth.Reg.Lab.Commissioner &Ors

Textile Mazdoor Union,Gurgaon Vs State of Haryana

Paramjit Singh Vs P.O.L.C. Ambala & Anr.

Chhatar Singh Vs P.O. Labour Court and Anr.