IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 6273 of 2009. Date of Decision : April 27, 2009. M/s Dada Motors, Jalandhar. ....... Petitioner. Versus. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jalandhar, and another. ....... Respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. O.P. Hoshiarpuri, Advocate, for the petitioner. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the award dated 02.02.2009 (Annexure-P-8), passed by the Labour Court, Jalandhar, vide which the reference has been answered in favour of the workman, holding him entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and 40% back wages. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the workman was found to have mis-appropriated some amount for which a show cause notice was issued to him and thereafter, an inquiry officer was appointed. Since, the workman did not join the proceedings and did not report for duty, the same would amount to abandonment of the job and therefore, the workman would not be entitled to benefit of the Industrial Disputes Act. He further contends that the workman had voluntary withdrawn the provident fund amount wherein he has clearly stated that he has left the job on his own which clearly prove that there was no termination of services of the workman and a clear case of abandonment. C.W.P. No. 6273 of 2009. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the records of the case. Perusal of the award and the evidence which has been placed on record shows that the services of the workman were required to be termination for a mis-conduct which was alleged to have been committed by him. For that the steps were initiated by the management by appointing an inquiry officer. The requirement of law, therefore, was that the inquiry proceedings should have been taken to the logical conclusion. Having not done been so, the plea as taken by the management with regard to abandonment of job, cannot be sustained. Nothing has been placed on records which would further substantiate this contention. The contention of counsel for the petitioner that the provident fund withdrawal by the workman which according to the management the workman had admitted in his cross-examination, does not go to prove the assertion of abandonment of service. It has come on record and a finding to that effect has been recorded by the Labour Court that there was over writing in the withdrawal form which goes to show that it was not a voluntary withdrawal of the amount by the workman as has been asserted by the management. Finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same stands dismissed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE April 27, 2009. sjks. -2-