CWP No. 15082 of 1994 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CWP No. 15082 of 1994 Date of decision: 14.7.2011 Tilak Raj ......Petitioner Versus Market Committee, Amritsar and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Ms.Gaganpreet Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.PKS Gill, Advocate for respondent No.1. **** SABINA, J. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the award dated 27.1.1993 as published in the official Gazette on 4.6.1993 (Annexure P-6) The petitioner raised an industrial dispute alleging therein that he had worked with the respondent-committee as safai sewak for two years on a salary of ` 390/- per month. On 21.4.1983, services of the petitioner were illegally terminated. The petitioner claimed re-instatement with continuity of services and back wages. CWP No. 15082 of 1994 2 The Labour Court vide its award dated 27.1.1993 (Annexure P-6) dismissed the reference and held that the petitioner was not entitled to any relief. Hence, the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had been successful in proving his case and was entitled for the relief claimed by him. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, has submitted that the petitioner had never been employed as a safai sewak by the respondent-market committee A perusal of the impugned award reveals that the petitioner had himself appeared in the witness box in support of his case but had failed to prove on record any appointment letter issued to him by the respondent-market committee, whereas, on the other hand, the specific case of the market committee was that the petitioner was never in their employment nor any salary had been paid to him. The Clerk of the market committee, who had appeared as a witness to substantiate the plea of the respondent committee had brought the relevant record to establish that the petitioner had never worked with the respondent committee. In these circumstances, learned Labour Court rightly came to the conclusion that there was no relationship of master and servant between the parties. Hence, no ground for interference by this Court is made out. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE July 14, 2011 anita CWP No. 15082 of 1994 3