IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.18706 of 2008 Date of decision:05.08.2009 District Transport Officer (D.T.O.), Rohtak now Sub Divisional Officer (C )-cum-Secretary, Regional Transport Authority. ....Petitioner versus Sh. Suresh Kumar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. D.S.Nalwa, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for the petitioner. Mr.Kamal Mor, Advocate, for respondent No.1. --- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The award in challenge is one that directs reinstatement with continuity of service and 50% back wages to a person who had been employed as a Sweeper in the office of Regional Transport Authority. The contention of the workman was that he had been appointed on 27.04.1985 and he was terminated without any notice abruptly on 01.01.1997. According to the workman, the termination of services was illegal and violated the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act and therefore, he was entitled for reinstatement. 2. Before the Labour Court it was contended on behalf of the management that the office of the Regional Transport Authority had been Civil Writ Petition No.18706 of 2008 - 2 - abolished by the Haryana Government Order and the functions of the office were now being carried on by the District Transport Officer. The termination was sequel to abolition of the office and therefore it would not amount to termination. It was the further contention of the management that the workman had not worked 240 days continuously prior to the date of alleged termination. 3. The Labour Court found on evidence through an admission of the management witness Shri Shamsher Singh Lamba, Assistant DTO, Rohtak, that the workman had actually worked continuously from 27.04.1995 to 01.01.1997. The Labour Court had, therefore, no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the workman had 240 days of continuous service. On the issue relating to reinstatement, the Labour Court reasoned that the management witness had also admitted that the office of RTA had been changed to District Transport Officer and therefore, it was merely a change in the office name. Admittedly, the workman was a temporary employee and appointment to public office was done through relevant recruitment rules and following the procedure prescribed by law and hence the right of reinstatement will not avail to the petitioner unless the post was available. When the Regional Transport Authority is abolished by the Government of Haryana, it is futile to suggest that merely because the functions of the RTA are being carried on by the District Transport Officer, the same continues in another name. The abolition of the office or the activities of the office are not the issues; the question is whether such an office exists and whether a post is available. On a categorical statement coming from Civil Writ Petition No.18706 of 2008 - 3 - the petitioner even before the Labour Court that the office of RTA had been abolished by the Government Order, the direction for reinstatement does not accord with law. 4. Taking up the admitted case of non-compliance of statutory requirement of section of 25-F, the workman shall be entitled to compensation and having regard to the fact that the workman had worked for a period from 27.04.1995 to 01.01.1997 that is about 21 months, I am of the view that appropriate compensation could be Rs.20,000/-. 5. The award of the Labour Court is set aside and the workman shall be entitled to compensation of Rs.20,000/- payable by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which it shall bear simple interest of 7.5% per annum. 6. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 05.08.2009 sanjeev