CWP No. 16958 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 16958 of 2010 Date of decision : 08.07.2011 Dalbir .....Petitioner versus The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Hisar ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.S. Nalwa, Addl. A.G Haryana **** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.04.2010 passed by the learned Labour Court rejecting the reference filed by the petitioner that he is not entitled for reinstatement in service with back wages. Learned counsel for the petitioner has restricted his argument to the amount of compensation awarded. He has argued that the petitioner was appointed as Beldar Class IV on a fixed salary and assigned the job on various roads divisions upto 25.12.2002 and he worked continuously with the satisfaction of the Management upto December 25, 2002. On 26.12.2002, the petitioner was not allowed to work in the department and his services were terminated without any notice, pay and compensation of retrenchment and thus, his services were terminated in violation of Section 25 of the Industrial CWP No. 16958 of 2010 -2- Disputes Act. The petitioner has worked for almost 22 years and compensation awarded to him is not reasonable keeping in view that he has served for such a long time. In the reply filed by the respondents, the year-wise details of the attendance register in respect of Dalvir is given as per Annexure R-1 which goes to prove that he has worked for almost 14 years. The Supreme Court in the case of Incharge Officer and another vs. Shankar Sheety, 2010(4), S.C.T 261 has observed that if termination of employee is found to be illegal, automatic reinstatement is not justified and it was held that the workmen was engaged as daily wager and he continued in service for about 7 years intermittently and relief of reinstatement granted to him by High Court is not justified and instead monetary compensation of Rupees One lac in lieu of reinstatement shall be appropriate , just and equitable. In the present case, the petitioner no doubt has worked for almost 14 years. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation to Rs. 1,00,000/- (only one lac) in lieu of reinstatement. The said payment shall be made within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and with interest of 6% per annum thereafter, if the payment is not made in time. July 08, 2011 (RITU BAHRI) G.Arora JUDGE