C.W.P. No. 15978 of 2011 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 15978 of 2011 Date of Decision: Sept. 1, 2011 Chander Parkash ........................................ Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Rohtak and another .......... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. ... RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Challenge is to the award dated 25.8.2010 (Annexure P-15) whereby the Reference has been answered against the workman. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Clerk with effect from 9.9.1982 (Annexure P1) at a fixed salary of `400/- per month by the Management-respondent No.1. After regularization of his services he was placed in the grade of Office Clerk with effect from 1.4.1985 (Annexure P2). C.W.P. No. 15978 of 2011 [ 2 ] Case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Office Clerk but he was discharging the duties of Accounts Clerk. He was issued the Experience Certificates to the effect that he was working as Accounts Clerk by the Management. He has made number of representations seeking the pay scale of Accounts Clerk (Annexure P-4) (Colly.). On 12.5.1992 petitioner was transferred to Halwasia Vidya Vihar (Annexure P6). The petitioner did not join his place of posting. He was charge-sheeted on 7.7.1992 on account of willful absence and insubordination. An inquiry was conducted and his services were dispensed with vide order dated 6.5.1993. On raising a demand notice, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court. Before the Labour Court the stand of the respondent-Management was that the petitioner had joined as Assistant Clerk on 9.9.1982 and was posted at Balwasia Bal Mandir, Bhiwani. In the month of May 1992 he was transferred to Halwasia Vidhya Vihar but the workman neither relinquished the charge nor he joined at the new post. He remained absent from duty and after conducting inquiry, his services were dispensed with. Mr. Pankaj Jain, counsel for the petitioner, has argued that on his transfer he had gone to relinquish his charge but could not do so as the premises were locked. He had made number of applications for grant of medical leave with effect from 15.5.1992 (Ex.M-27) for grant of two days C.W.P. No. 15978 of 2011 [ 3 ] medical leave. Subsequently, he made applications Ex.M-28, M-37 and M-40 but the said applications have not been considered while dispensing with his services. The Management had sought Medical Certificate duly issued by the competent authority i.e. C.M.O., Bhiwani, for considering his application for medical leave. No such Certificate was ever sent by the workman. In view of the above facts, the Labour Court has come to a conclusion that the petitioner-workman was not inclined to join his duty at the place of transfer and thereafter by conducting an inquiry his services have been dispensed. No other point has been argued by the counsel for the petitioner. Once the employer has lost confidence in the workman the Court is not required to go into quantum of punishment which has been passed after following due process of law. Writ petition is dismissed. 1.9.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE