L.P.A No. 253 of 2011 (O&M). -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- L.P.A No. 253 of 2011 (O&M). Date of decision:- May 4th, 2011 Subhash Chander & Ors. ... Appellants. Versus State of Haryana & Ors. ... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present:- Mr. Ravinder Malik, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Aman Chaudhary, Addl. A.G., Haryana for respondents No. 1 to 3. Mr. Bikram Chaudhary, Advocate, for respondent No. 4. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? M.M.Kumar, J. 1. The instant appeal filed by the appellants is directed against the order dated 21.1.2011 passed by learned Single Judge, holding that the apprehension of the appellant that his services would be terminated was wholly misplaced and the writ petition was pre-mature. In order to ensure as to whether the respondents are likely to dispense with the service of appellants, we have directed the learned State counsel to seek instructions. The learned State counsel has filed a written statement on behalf of the respondents in the Court today. In para No.4 it is stated that the question of replacing the servies of the appellants and grant of regular pay-scale to them L.P.A No. 253 of 2011 (O&M). -2- would not arise because they are employed through service provider and they are not employees of the respondent-State. 2. Accordingly, we find that there is a disputed question of fact, which can be more appropriatly resolved by the Labour Court. Accordingly, the appellants are relegated to avail the remedy under the Industries Disputes Act, 1947, by seeking reference for raising the dispute before the Labour Court. 3. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. (M.M.Kumar) Judge May 4, 2011 (Gurdev Singh) tripti Judge