IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 13469 of 2010 Date of Decision: 08.11.2011 Narayan Sharma ...Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Present : Mr. R.B.Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents. **** SURYA KANT, J.(Oral) The petitioner-workman is aggrieved by the award dated 15.01.2010 whereby the reference as to “whether the action of the management of PGIMER in terminating his services is justified or not?” has been answered against him. 2. When the matter came up for preliminary hearing on 02.08.2010, it was brought to the notice of the Court that petitioner had moved an application for summoning the record of the PGIMER, Chandigarh to prove that he was being paid wages by the PGI directly but without deciding the said application, the Labour Court passed the impugned award on the premise that the petitioner was an employee of the contractor. 3. The fact that the above stated application was pending consideration before the Tribunal, is not disputed by the respondents also. In these circumstances and without expressing any views on the CWP No. 13469 of 2010 [2] petitioner's claim, I allow the writ petition; set-aside the impugned award and remit the matter to the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1, Chanidgarh to firstly dispose of the petitioner's application for summoning of the record of PGIMER, Chandigarh and thereafter decide the main reference in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on 05.12.2011. Dasti. 08.11.2011 (SURYA KANT) 'ravinder' JUDGE