CWP No.11874 of 2003 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: CWP No.11874 of 2003 DATE OF DECISION: April 24, 2008 STATE OF HARYANA ...PETITIONER VERSUS SMT. HAR KAUR AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. PRESENT: MR. SUNIL NEHRA, AAG, HARYANA, FOR THE PETITIONER. MR. RAKESH NAGPAL, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned award dated 1.10.2002 (Annexure P-9), passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar, vide which respondent No.1 has been held entitled for reinstatement with 25% back wages, continuity of service and all service benefits. Smt. Har Kaur, respondent No.1 was engaged as a part-time Sweeperess on Collector Rates on 1.4.1983. She worked upto January, 1988 and was removed from service. Respondent No.1 rejoined with the respondents on 15.6.1991, and worked upto 13.6.1999, when a regular Sweeper was appointed. The workman served a demand notice (Annexure P-2) upon the respondents, however, as no conciliation could take place, the matter was referred to the Labour Court. The Labour Court vide its award dated CWP No.11874 of 2003 -2- 1.10.2002 (Annexure P-9) has ordered reinstatement of the workman. Counsel for the State has submitted that the workman was appointed as a part-time Sweeperess on Collector Rates and therefore, she does not fall within the definition of workman and as such the award is liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uttranchal Forest Hospital Trust vs. Dinesh Kumar, reported as 2008(1) SCC 542, wherein the order of reinstatement of workman was held to be unjustified as the workman was working as a part-timer. In the present case also the workman has herself admitted that she was engaged on part-time basis as a Sweeperess in PWD(B&R) at Sirsa. She used to work on part-time basis for a period of 2 hours everyday. However, as the petitioner has rendered service for almost 17 years as a part-time Sweeperess and is in litigation since 12.3.1999, therefore, in our considered opinion the workman would be entitled to compensation. In view of the aforementioned discussion, we set aside the award (Annexure P-9), and hold that the respondent-workman shall be entitled to a lump-sum compensation of Rs.50,000/-. The amount of compensation shall be paid to the workman within a period of 2 months from today. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE April 24, 2008 (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) Gulati JUDGE