IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH L.P.A.No. 667 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.7.2009 Divisional Forest Officer (SFP), Hisar, now Divisional Forest Officer (T), Fatehabad. ......Appellant Vs. Bharat Singh alias Bharta and another ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY PRESENT: Ms.Palika Monga, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for the appellant. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral) 1. The State is aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge quashing the award of reinstatement with continuity of service and 50% back-wages and substituting the same by direction to give compensation of Rs.60,000/-. 2. The learned Single Judge has relied upon judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ghaziabad Development Authority and another V. Ashok Kumar and another 2008 (4) SCC 261, Mahboob Deepak Vs. Nagar Panchayat, Gajraula (2008) 1 SCC 575 (MP), Administration Vs. Tribhuwan (2007) 9 SCC 748 and State of M.P. And others V. Lalit Kumar Verma [2007] 1 SCC 575 and judgment of this Court in State of Haryana Vs. Ishwar Singh and another 2008[3] SCT 788. In the last judgment, it was observed that a daily wager may be entitled to compensation where termination of services was without following the prescribed procedure. L.P.A.NO. 667 of 2009 [2] 3. The learned Single Judge observed that the workman had worked for about six years and termination was without any procedure and was entitled to compensation of Rs.60,000/-. 4. Having regard to the fact that learned Single Judge has followed the earlier judgment of this Court in Ishwar Singh's case (supra) which is not shown to be distinguishable, and compensation awarded is only Rs.60,000/-, we do not find any ground to interfere. 5. The appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE (DAYA CHAUDHARY) July 27, 2009 JUDGE raghav Note: Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter? ........Yes/No L.P.A.NO. 667 of 2009 [3] L.P.A.NO. 667 of 2009 [4]