C.W.P. No. 16238 of 1990 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 16238 of 1990 Date of Decision: March 10,2010 State of Punjab ........................................................... Petitioner Versus Sh. Ram Dass and another ...................................... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta Present: Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, DAG, Punjab, for the petitioner. ... ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 16238, 16239, 16240, 16241, 16276, 16277 and 16278 of 1990 as common question of law and fact arises in all these cases. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being extracted from C.W.P. No. 16238 of 1990. The State of Punjab has filed this writ petition impugning the award (Annexure P-2) passed by the Labour Court, Gurdaspur, vide which the workmen in the aforementioned writ petitions have been held entitled to retrenchment compensation as under:- 1. Parkash Chand ........ Rs. 8800/- (Ret. Com. For 6 months and 2 months notice pay). 2. Ram Dass ....... Rs. 5850/- (Ret. Com. For 4-1/2 months & 2 months notice pay). 3. Chaman Lal ....... Rs. 7800/- - do - C.W.P. No. 16238 of 1990 [ 2 ] 4. Kishan Chand ........ Rs. 7150/- - do - 5. Kehar Singh ......... Rs. 5200/- - do - 6. Hans Raj ......... Rs. 5200/- - do - 7. Jaswant Singh ......... Rs. 7800/- - do - The amounts awarded to the petitioners by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur, are very meagre. Apart from the above, there is no illegality in the impugned award as all the workmen have been held entitled to the retrenchment compensation as the petitioners did not serve three months notice as envisaged under Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or pay in lieu of the notice. No legal infirmity has been pointed out by the learned State Counsel in the impugned award. Resultantly, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed. 10.3.2010 ( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA ) Rupi JUDGE