IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. L.P.A. No.757 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.4.2011 Sanat Kumar Ray. -----Appellant. Vs. The Presiding Officer & another. -----Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred against order of learned Single Judge whereby order of the Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court was upheld. 2. The appellant filed application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, “the Act”) seeking to recover the amount claimed to be due towards medical expenses, salary and other heads. The claim was disputed and after due consideration, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that proceedings under Section 33-C(2) of the Act could not be initiated for adjudication of disputed questions being in the nature L.P.A. No.757 of 2011 of execution. This view has been upheld by learned Single Judge. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 4. It cannot be disputed that Section 33-C(2) of the Act is in the nature of summary proceedings for execution of settled rights of the parties and is not substitute for adjudication of disputed questions. Reference may be made to judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in UPSRTC v. Birendra Bhandari (2006) 10 SCC 211. 5. In view of above, no interference is called for with the view taken by learned Single Judge. 6. The appeal is dismissed. It is made clear that this order will not affect the remedies of the appellant in accordance with law. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE April 29, 2011 ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 2