IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17317 of 2008 Date of Decision: September 10, 2010 PWD Labour Union & Others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing Order dated 15.9.2008 (Annexure P-8) passed by respondent No.4 i.e. Executive Engineer, Division No.1, PWD (B & R), Patiala, vide which the petitioners have been asked to join duties on Saturday also despite the notification issued by the Punjab Government. 2. The facts in detail are not required to be given in so much as it is the conceded position that there would be disputed questions of facts for adjudication. Matter needs to be relegated to CWP No.17317 of 2008 [2] authority under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, `the Act’). It transpires that some of the petitioners have already approached the authority for making claim under Section 33-C(2) of the Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on judgment dated 13.2.2009 rendered by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.20865 of 2008 titled `Commission Secretary, Printing and Stationery, Haryana & another vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.T. Chandigarh & another’. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that the respondents would not have any objection if the petitioners are relegated to the remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act. 5. This petition is accordingly disposed of while holding that the petitioners, who have not approached the authority under Section 33-C(2) of the Act, would be entitled to approach the Tribunal under the Act. (AJAI LAMBA) September 10, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?