CWP No.15228 of 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.15228 of 1990 Date of Decision: 13.05.2011 The Municipality Gardhiwala ... Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court Gurdaspur Camp at Hoshiarpur and Anr. ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present: Mr. M.S. Kang, Advocate and Mr. Satvir Rathore, Advocate the petitioners. None for the respondents. ***** 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 directing the reinstatement of a workman, who was working as Octroi Clerk with the Municipality, Gardhiwala and who complained that he had been terminated from service without following the procedure under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act (for brevity, ‘the Act’). 2. Before the Labour Court, the workman adduced evidence to the fact that he had worked since 19th April, 1986 on daily wages for more than 240 days and deliberate breaks in service have been made to prevent the continuity of service and to exclude him for claiming benefits under the Act. The Labour Court found that the workman had established that he had the requisite number of days of services and further rejected the contention of the CWP No.15228 of 1990 -2- Management that the work was temporary and he was liable to be terterminated. 3. It was contended in the reply before the Labour Court that a post of Octroi Clerk itself was abolished and therefore, he could not be reinstated. I do not find any error in the order passed by the Labour Court when it found that there was nothing to suggest that he had been employed only as Octroi Clerk and the Management could not plead abolition of the post to justify the termination. 4. However, having regard to the nature of engagement and by the fact that he had worked about 14 months only, I will not think, it is necessary to direct reinstatement. The petitioner had been receiving the benefit of salary last drawn in terms of Section 17-B of the Act. Having with regard to the fact that the petitioner had realized a modicum of monetary benefits during the pendency of the case for all these years, I direct that instead of reinstatement, the workman is compensated by payment of an amount of Rs.25,000/-. The amount shall be paid within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. The award passed by the Labour Court is modified and the writ petition is allowed to the extent of above terms. MAY 13, 2011 ( K. KANNAN ) Rajan JUDGE