IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.16033 of 2008 Date of decision : 9th September, 2008 Satya Devi … Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present : Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. Present writ petition has been filed by Smt. Satya Devi (hereinafter referred to as, ‘workman’), impugning the award dated 07.08.2007 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Labour Court, Ambala, whereby prayer of the petitioner-workman for reinstatement in service has been declined and it has been held that the management was justified to terminate the services of the petitioner-workman. Brief facts can be taken from the writ petition, wherein it has been stated that petitioner-workman was appointed as Anganwari worker on 25th August, 1994. According to the petitioner-workman, her services were regularized on 24th April, 1996 but the management terminated her services on 9th December, 1996. Petitioner had approached Labour Court and an award was passed on 05.09.2002, whereby she was reinstated in Civil Writ Petition No.16033 of 2008 service with continuity, however, management was afforded an opportunity to terminate the services of the petitioner-workman after complying with the due procedure. Petitioner-workman claimed that she submitted her joining report on 07.02.2003 but she was not allowed to join her duty. Subsequently, petitioner-workman was allowed to join her duties on 29.04.2003. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued by the management on 14.05.2003. A reply was submitted to the show cause notice and services of the petitioner-workman were terminated on 10.09.2003. Petitioner-workman raised a demand notice, on the basis of which, a reference was made by the State of Haryana to the Labour Court. In pursuance of the reference, Labour Court noticed the contention of the management that the petitioner-workman was not eligible to be posted as Anganwari worker at village Saini Majra, as she had obtained the job of Anganwari worker by producing forged/ false domicile/ residence certificate. It has been further averred that vide award dated 05.09.2002, management was granted opportunity to terminate services of the petitioner, if so advised, after following the due procedure by the competent authority. Learned Labour Court noticed that award dated 05.09.2002 had become final between the parties as none of the parties had challenged the award in higher Court of law. Labour Court held that award dated 05.09.2002 (Ex.MW/17) leave no course open to assail the present termination. Findings of the award dated 05.09.2002 (Ex.MW/17) in para 13, which has been reproduced by the Labour Court, read as under: “Workman herself admitted that she belongs to Amritsar and is married in Sujanpur (Pathankot) Punjab. Nagar Mal her husband is posted as Head Master in village Baknor, Distt. Ambala. In the year 1994 he was posted at Sonta but used to live in a rented house at Ambala City. She had taken a house 2 Civil Writ Petition No.16033 of 2008 on rent from Smt. Surjito at village Saini Majra and used to life in it. Workman when herself admits that she is a permanent resident of Amritsar (Punjab) and was married at Sujanpur (Pathankot) no dispute remains about it. Merely that she took a house on rent at village Saini Majra and used to live there for the last about ½ years won’t make her a permanent resident of that village. It is strange to see as to how she got the domicile certificate issued showing her a permanent resident of that village i.e. Saini Majra. Not only this, she got an another domicile certificate, issued from the concerned authority i.e. SDO (Civil), Ambala, showing herself a permanent resident of village Rattangarh. This shows that the certificates were issued in the routine without making any enquiries and observing the required formalities. Workman was not a permanent resident of village Saini Majra so she was not eligible to be posted as Anganwari worker there. She got the domicile certificate issued falsely, illegally and got the job. The management rightly and legally terminated her services, after seeking her explanation. But the order, impugned cannot sustain because it was not passed by the appointing authority. Workman was appointed by the Director, Women & Child Development Department, Haryana Chandigarh as is evident from the appointment letter dated 29.2.1996 Ex.M-1 but her services were dispensed with by the Programme Officer, Ambala. This is clear from the order dated 4.12.1996 Ex.M-4. The P.O. was not the appointing authority of the workman. Only the Director, Women & Child Development Department was competent to remove the workman from the service and not the authority below her rank.” Labour Court also noticed para 14 and 16 of the award dated 05.09.2002 and held as under: “Therefore, in the light of the aforesaid definite findings, observations and direction of the Labour Court, Ambala as contained in its final award dated 5.9.02 Ex.MW/17, the limited 3 Civil Writ Petition No.16033 of 2008 scope which is left before this Court is to see as to whether the management has terminated the services of the present petitioner for the second time vide impugned order dated 10.9.03 in accordance with the spirit of the award dated 5.9.02 Ex.MW/17, in question passed by the Labour Court or not.” During the course of arguments, counsel for the petitioner has admitted that award dated 05.09.2002 was not challenged. Since the award dated 05.09.2002 had attained finality and it has come in evidence that petitioner had obtained the job, to which she was not entitled, on the basis of a fake/ fabricated document, this Court cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner-workman. Hence, the present writ petition is dismissed. [HEMANT GUPTA] JUDGE [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE September 09, 2008. rps 4