IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 13836 of 2011 Date of decision : 02.08.2011 Kamal Sharma ......Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioner **** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Petitioner is seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider of the petitioner for reinstatement in service as per judgment of Hon'ble Division Bench upholding the award of the Labour Court (Annexure P-6) and as per judgment of the Hon'ble High Court in CWP No. 2721 of 2002 (Annexure P-7). Petitioner was selected and appointed on 89 days basis and was posted at various places in District Patiala (Annexure P-1). On receipt of the appointment letter, the petitioner submitted his joining report on 04.08.1997. The appointment of the petitioner was extended from time to time and he had been continuing with the notional break of few days. He has further submitted that after the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed a decision in 'State of Haryana and others vs. Piara Singh & others, 1992(5) SC 179', the Punjab Government has framed one such policy for regularization of all those employees who were appointed on work charge basis on daily wages and other categories of workers, who have been appointed in various Government Departments provided they have completed three years of service on 23.01.2001. The petitioner approached the respondents with a request to regularise his services but they have asked him not to come and work w.e.f 28.05.2001. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Annexure P-4 whereby the department has not complied with the orders passed by this Court in CWP No. 11096 of 2011, decided on 31.07.2011 to consider the claim of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioner has then referred to Labour Court award (Annexure P-5) whereby it was held as under: “It is declare that the termination of services of the workman is unjustified. The workman is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service. The workman is not entitled to get back wages. The workman shall report for duty to the management within 30 days from the date of publication of this award”. The department challenged the above said award dated 08.05.2005 by filing CWP No. 3435 of 2006. The Hon'ble High Court dismissed the writ petition vide order dated 31.08.2005 (Annexure P-6).The department has challenged the order dated 31.08.2006 in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. However, no stay was granted in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Annexure P-5 wherein the termination of services of workman was found to be unjustified and he was further held entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and the Division Bench of this Court has also upheld the decision of the labour Court and this judgment has also attained finality and number of employees has also been given the benefit. In view of the above factual position, this petition is disposed of by giving a direction to respondent No. 1 to pass a speaking order on the legal notice (Annexure P-8) of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. August 02 , 2011 (RITU BAHRI) G.Arora JUDGE