CWP No.6388 of 2006 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.6388 of 2006 Date of Decision: 11.9.2008 Khiali Ram .....Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana and others ....Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Shri D.R. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Sunil Nehra, AAG, Haryana. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? HEMANT GUPTA, J. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the Award passed by the Labour Court (Annexure P.4) dated 16.7.2004, whereby the order terminating the services of the workman, was set aside and the workman was ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service but without backwages. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for setting aside of the Award to the extent the backwages have been denied to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that once the learned Labour Court has returned a finding that the termination of the services of the workman was illegal and unjustified, the petitioner is entitled to backwages as a matter of right and, therefore, the learned Labour Court has erred in law in not granting backwages to the petitioner. CWP No.6388 of 2006 (2) In Muir Mills Unit of NTC (U.P.) Ltd. v. Swayam Prakash Srivastava, (2007)1 SCC 491, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the payment of full backwages is not a natural consequence of setting aside an order of termination of service. The learned Labour Court has exercised its judicial discretion in not granting the backwages. The grant of backwages is not a natural consequence. In the absence of any finding that the workman was not gainfully employed, the petitioner is not entitled to backwages. In view of the said fact, we do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned Award passed by the learned Labour Court, so as to award backwages to the petitioner, in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, the present writ petition is dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) JUDGE 11.9.2008 ds