IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA LPA No. 354 of 2010 alongwith LPA Nos. 355, 356 and 357 of 2010. Date of Decision : August 29, 2011 1. LPA No. 354 of 2010 H.P.S.E.B and another … Appellants. Versus Amar Singh and another … Respondents. 2. LPA No. 355 of 2010 H.P.S.E.B and another … Appellants. Versus Jagdish Chand and another … Respondents. 3. LPA No. 356 of 2010 H.P.S.E.B and another … Appellants. Versus Mazid Deen and another … Respondents. 4. LPA No. 357 of 2010 H.P.S.E.B and another … Appellants. Versus Jagdish Chand and another … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the appellants : Mr. Trilok Jamwal, Advocate, for the appellant(s) in all the appeals. For the respondent: Mr. A. K. Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No. 1, in all the appeals. Justice Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) In the instant appeals challenge is primarily to the directions issued by the learned Single Judge of this Court holding the petitioners entitled to 50% back wages on the basis of another 2 judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 1041 of 2008, titled as Sattar Mohammad versus The H.P. State Electricity Board and others, dated 9.1.2009. However, vide judgment dated 29.8.2011 this Court in LPA No. 11 of 2011 has clearly held that the decision in Sattar Mohammad’s case is purely applicable to the peculiar facts of that case. 2. As such the said decision cannot be said to be a binding precedent and applicable to the instant facts. 3. It is not in dispute that petitioners are likely to be re-engaged by the appellants within a fortnight, as such, appeals are partly allowed and direction, to the extent that the petitioners shall be entitled to 50% back wages is set aside. 4. Appeals are disposed of with the aforesaid directions. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Sanjay Karol), Judge. August 29, 2011 (PK)