HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.11377 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.10.2011 **** Satbir Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hisar & Anr. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. ID Singla, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma, DAG Haryana **** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner was assigned duty of electrical wiring on daily-wage basis by the Principal, Government Institute of Engineering & Technology, Hisar vide memo dated 16.10.1995 (Annexure P1). The petitioner continued with that assignment till November, 1998 when his services were dispensed with. (2). The petitioner raised an industrial dispute alleging that the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short, the Act’) have not been complied with. The Labour Court, Hisar having found that the petitioner’s services were dispensed with without complying with the provisions of Section 25-F and 25-G of the Act has awarded him the compensation of Rs.25,000/- in lieu of reinstatement. CWP No.11377 of 2011.doc - 2 – (3). The aggrieved petition has approached this Court. (4). Learned counsel for the parties have been heard and records perused. (5). It could not be disputed on behalf of the petitioner that he was engaged without following any selection process and/or giving opportunity to other eligible candidates to compete. It was a kind of backdoor entry given to the petitioner in a Government institute. There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner was appointed against a sanctioned post as the order of engagement (Annexure P1) simply suggests that he was “assigned the duty of Electrical Wiring in the workshop of this Institution….”. In such circumstances, the Labour Court appears to be justified in declining reinstatement to the petitioner. (6). As regards the amount of compensation, the general trend is to award Rs.20,000/- per year as compensation to a such like workman. (7). Be that as it may, keeping in view the total working days of the petitioner from the year 1995 to 1998, the ends of justice would be appropriately met if the compensation amount of Rs.25,000/- is enhanced to Rs.40,000/-. (8). Ordered accordingly. (9). The enhanced amount of compensation shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of CWP No.11377 of 2011.doc - 3 – receipt of a certified copy of this order failing which the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum. (10). The writ petition stands disposed of. 20.10.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge