IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13303 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision : 11th September, 2008 Executive Engineer, Irrigation Branch, Bhiwani … Petitioner Versus Jagdish and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present : Mr. D.S.Nalwa, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Verma, Advocate for respondent No.1. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. Civil Misc. No. 18072 of 2008 Application allowed. Written statement on behalf of respondent No.1 is taken on record. Civil Writ Petition No. 13303 of 2007 Present writ petition has been preferred by Executive Engineer, Irrigation Branch, Bhiwani (hereinafter referred to as, ‘management’) against Jagdish (hereinafter referred to as, ‘workman’). Civil Writ Petition No.13303 of 2007 Challenge, in the present writ petition, is to the award dated 05.10.2006 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Labour Court, Rohtak, whereby respondent-workman has been reinstated to his previous post with continuity of service with 50 per cent back wages. Demand notice (Annexure P-1) dated 12.08.1999 was served by the respondent-workman, wherein he pleaded that he was engaged as Beldar on 01.12.1996 and his services were terminated on 01.08.1999. It was further averred therein that his name was changed in the muster roll in the month of June - July 1997 in order to show break in his service. In reply (Annexure P-2) to the demand notice, it was submitted that the workman was engaged as a casual labourer and not as Beldar. His duty was that of night watching of the channels during the running period. It is not in dispute that workman was a daily wager. The grievance of the respondent-workman before the Labour Court was that his services were terminated without serving any notice. He was paid no notice pay and retrenchment compensation was also not paid and thus, violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’) has been committed. A further plea has been raised that his juniors were working with the management and maxim of ‘last come first go’ has not been adhered to. The Labour Court concluded that the workman has rendered service of more than 240 days and that since provisions of Section 25-F of the Act have not been complied with, the workman is entitled to reinstatement. Since entry of the workman into service was a backdoor entry and was neither in pursuance of any advertisement issued nor his name was requisitioned from any employment exchange and no equal 2 Civil Writ Petition No.13303 of 2007 opportunity was afforded to similarly situated persons, therefore, termination of services of the workman will not amount to retrenchment. The workman could not be reinstated in view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi and others (2006) 4 SCC 1. We find that the view taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Municipal Council, Samrala v. Raj Kumar (2006) 3 SCC 81 is that unless an employee is appointed as per rules and regulations, his/her appointment cannot be treated to be consistent with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Appointment given de hors the rules and regulations is liable to termination and is covered under Section 2(oo) (bb) of the Act and thus, does not amount to retrenchment. Similarly, in Gangadhar Pillai v. Siemens Limited (2007) 1 SCC 533, Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Workmen (2007) 1 SCC 408, Reserve Bank of India v. Gopinath Sharma and another (2006) 6 SCC 221 and UP Power Corporation Ltd. and another v. Bijli Mazdoor Sangh and others (2007) 5 SCC 755, it has been held that reinstatement of a workman in public employment will not be consistent with Article 14 unless a workman had been appointed by following rules and regulations. In view of the above, we have no other option except to allow the present writ petition and set aside the impugned award dated 05.10.2006 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Labour Court, Rohtak. [HEMANT GUPTA] JUDGE [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE September 11, 2008. rps 3