C.W.P. No.1216 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.1216 of 2008 Decided on :18-11-2008 D.A.V. Public School, Rewari. ....Petitioner VERSUS Presiding Officer, Labour Court & another ....Respondents CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH. Present:- Mr. M.L. Puri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Malik, Advocate for respondent No.2. HEMANT GUPTA, J The challenge in the present writ petition is to the Award of the Labour Court dated 04.04.2006 (Annexure P-5), whereby respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the workman') was ordered to be reinstated in service with continuity of service and 40% of back wages were ordered to be paid to the workman. It is the case of the workman that he was appointed by the Management as a Peon on 12.08.1995 and his services were terminated illegally on 20.11.1996 without payment of retrenchment compensation, notice or pay compensation and thus, such termination in violation of Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') is void. The learned Labour Court returned a finding that the workman has worked for more than 240 days and therefore, his services could not have been terminated without complying with the procedure contemplated under Section 25-F of the Act. After returned such findings, the Industrial C.W.P. No.1216 of 2008 -2- Dispute, was answered in favour of the workman. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the petitioner-School was closed in 2005 and therefore, the workman cannot be ordered to be reinstated with backwages. However, there is no pleading to the said effect before the learned Labour Court. It is the question of fact which was required to be raised by the petitioner at the appropriate stage. On merits, it has been found that the workman has worked for more than 240 days and that his services have been terminated without any retrenchment notice and compensation. In fact, the stand of the petitioner in the written statement was that the workman has insulted the Principal in the presence of other teachers and used to absent from duty without prior information. Therefore, the finding recorded cannot be said to be illegal in any manner. We do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned Award which may warrant interference in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, the present writ petition is dismissed. (Hemant Gupta) Judge 18th November 2008. (Nawab Singh) Monika Judge