CWP No. 16171 of 1991 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 16171 of 1991 Date of Decision: 5.4.2011 *** Nathu Ram & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Hisar & Anr. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. Jitender Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. None for the respondents. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioners have laid challenge to the award dated 15.1.1991 rendered by respondent No.1. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners, at one point of time, were serving with respondent No.2 as Driver/ Conductor. After their termination they raised an industrial dispute seeking wages due to them from the respondent-management. It was their case that they were not paid the wages for the period January 1982 to October, 1983. The stand of the respondent-management was that petitioner Murari Lal never remained their employee for the period January 1982 to April 1982 while he was duly paid the wages for the period May 1982 to 30.9.1983. With regard to petitioners Nathu and Tirlok it was pleaded that no wages are due towards the management and these employees had been paid upto 30.9.1983 @ Rs.425/- and Rs.325/- per month respectively. Still any amount is due the respondent-management is ready to pay the same. On the basis of evidence adduced by the parties, the learned Tribunal concluded that the wages for the period 1.10.1983 to 10.10.1983 only are due in respect of Murari Lal and Tirlok while the management was directed to pay the outstanding wages to Nathu for the period 1.9.1983 to 7.10.1983 within a period of one month, failing which interest @ 12% was CWP No. 16171 of 1991 2 awarded. Only to the aforesaid period, the applications of the petitioners were allowed while their claim for the remaining period was dismissed. Hence this writ petition. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the paper book carefully. It has come on record that petitioner Murari Lal was proved to be an employee of some other firm from January 1982 to April 1982 and this fact was also not disputed by his counsel before the Tribunal below. The cash book entries produced by the management showed the payment of wages to these workmen from May 1982 to September, 1983 along with other employees. None of the other employees complained about the non payment of wages. No doubt, the management admitted that they do not maintain the attendance as well as wages register, but they produced the cash book entries to show the payment of the wages to the petitioners. Had such entries been fabricated, the petitioners would have examined the other employees who were shown to have paid the wages to prove that the same are not genuine and in fact they have not been paid the wages. Thus, it was rightly concluded that cash book entries are genuine. In support of such findings it was also taken into consideration that had these employees not been paid the wages for the aforesaid period which comes to about 21 months, they would not have remained mum up-till the termination of their services, rather would have raised the dispute at an earlier stage. The plea that the amount of wages were deposited by the petitioners to help the management was rightly dealt with by the Tribunal below by holding that such a deposit falls within the definition of fixed deposit, with or without interest, for recovery of which the Industrial Tribunal is not the proper forum and it lies within the domain of the Civil Court. The Tribunal below analyzed the evidence on record in the right perspective and rightly awarded the amount for the period which was found due to the workmen by giving the detailed reasons. There is no merit in the instant writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE April 05, 2011 Jiten