IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 1905 of 2009. Date of Decision : February 05, 2009. Gyan Dhwaj School. .... Petitioner. Versus. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala and another. ...Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present: Mr. Jasmeet Singh Bedi, Advocate, for the petitioner. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). In the present writ petition, the challenge has been made to an award dated 06.02.2008 (Annexure-P-2), vide which the reference was answered in favour of the workman holding him entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. Counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent-workman was an Accountant and not employed with the petitioner-institution and was doing independent work for various institutions. There is no document which has been placed on record to substantiate this contention raised by the petitioner. He further contends that he has not completed 240 days in the preceding 12 months. It goes without saying that the statement of the workman which has been relied upon by the Court clearly indicates that he has been working with the petitioner-institution for the last three years before his termination. Counsel for the petitioner contends that this was an ex-parte award which was given against the petitioner wherein initially the petitioner had put in appearance before the Labour Court, Ambala, through an employee who left the institution without intimating the proceedings which C.W.P. No. 1905 of 2009. were pending before the Labour Court and therefore, subsequently they could not put in appearance before the Labour Court. He further contends that on coming to know about the award having been passed, the petitioner decided to comply with the said award and accordingly issued letters dated 15.10.2008, 23.10.2008 and 01.11.2008 calling upon the workman to join duty as per the award but the workman has not come present till date. He further contends that the authorities under the Industrial disputes Act have also been intimated about the intention of the petitioner to comply with the award passed by the Labour Court, Ambala. He contends that now proceedings for execution of the award has been launched against the petitioner and a decision has been take to prosecute the petitioner. He contends that since the petitioner is ready and willing to comply with the award, the prosecution is not called for. A perusal of the records would show that no document has been placed on record that prosecution has been initiated against the petitioner. Pleadings to this effect are also not present in the present writ petition, therefore, no cognizance of the same can be taken, however, since the petitioner has already taken a decision to implement the award, therefore, no interference in the present writ petition is called for. No illegality has been pointed out by the petitioner which would persuade this Court to interfere in the present writ petition. Finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same stands dismissed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE February 05, 2009. sjks. -2- C.W.P. No. 1905 of 2009. and -3-