IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.1084 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 15.9.2010 M/s Baba Kharag Singh-Baba Darshan Singh, I.T.I. … Appellant Versus Happy Gupta and another …Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr.Justice M.M.Kumar Hon’ble Ms.Justice Ritu Bahri Present: Mr.Vivek Salathia, Advocate for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.Kumar, J. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of Letters Patent, is directed against judgment dated 1.5.2009, rendered by learned Single Judge in CWP No.1582 of 2008 upholding the award of the Labour Court by reinstating the workman with 30 % back wages. There is no mitigating circumstance however, placed before the Labour Court or before the learned Single Judge to show that the reinstatement was not possible option. A plea was raised that the electronic trade has been closed but without substantiating the same by adducing any evidence. Therefore, the said defense has remained unsubstantiated. In the absence of any mitigating circumstance, the Labour Court has passed the award which has been upheld by the learned Single Judge reinstating the workman with 30 % back wages. The aforesaid view is supported by the latest judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in case of Harjinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2010(3) SCC 192. LPA No.1084 of 2010 There is, thus, no merit in the instant appeal, and the same is accordingly dismissed. In view of the fact that the appeal has been dismissed on merit, we are not inclined to pass any order on the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of 408 days delay in filing this appeal. (M.M.Kumar ) Judge (Ritu Bahri) Judge 15.09.2010 sd 2