C.W.P. No.4514 of 2001 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.4514 of 2001 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.10.2009 Balwant Singh .....Petitioner Versus The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, U.T., Chandigarh and another ...Respondents Present: Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petition challenges the award passed by the Labour Court on 18.03.1998, where the Labour Court proceeded with a situation of the workman not appearing before it and examining the witness on the side of the management. The Labour Court had accepted the contention of the management on the first hearing when the written statement was filed that the workman had worked for 58 days in Haematology Department, 45 days in Chief Dietitian Department and 51 days in EAC Division. The Court, therefore, observed that the workman had not shown that he had completed 240 days and dismissed the petition. 2. The contention on behalf of the workman was that he had C.W.P. No.4514 of 2001 (O&M) -2- never been apprised of the reference and the notice had never been sent by the Labour Court to him. The Labour Court records are here before this Court and I find that the workman has been stated to be residing in House No.1148, Sector 24, Chandigah but there is nothing on record to show that the Labour Court had ever served him at that address. The contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-workman is that after he lost his job, he had left Chandigarh and he had been living in House No.6, Village Khuda Lahora, U.T., Chandigarh and if he had known about the reference, he would have participated in the proceedings. In a case where the workman had not been shown to have been served from the Labour Court, it will be asking for the impossible to expect the workman to have proved that he had completed 240 days of service. Although the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is not able to give specific dates when he was working and furnish the details that he had worked for 240 days, I still do not want to enter upon the issue whether the workman has any tenable case. It will be decided by the Labour on a due adjudication with the opportunities granted to both parties to adduce evidence to substantiate their respective pleas. 3. The award of dismissal of the reference is set aside and the writ petition is ordered directing the Labour Court to enter an adjudication on the rival contentions by affording to the parties opportunity to let in evidence both oral and documentary. Having regard to the fact that the case pertains to a reference of the year 1997, it is requested that the Labour Court disposes of the case as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months C.W.P. No.4514 of 2001 (O&M) -3- from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. For appearance before the Labour Court on 10.11.1009. 4. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 05, 2009 Pankaj*