In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh L.P.A. No. 1760 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: September 20, 2011 State Bank of India ---Appellant versus Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1, Chandigarh and another ---Respondents Coram: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH *** Present: Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate, for the appellant *** 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.Kumar, J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against interim order dated 12.5.2011 passed by learned Single Judge modifying the earlier interim order dated 13.11.2009 staying the award of the Labour Court dated 18.5.2009(P-8). By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has directed that the interim order dated 13.11.2009 shall be subject to the compliance of the provisions of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity “the Act”). It is appropriate to mention that the Labour Court has held that when the application for approval of dismissal order is rejected the employee is considered to be in service for all purposes. Accordingly, the petition moved by the workman-respondent was allowed and the award was directed to be published. L.P.A. No. 1760 of 2011(O&M) -2- We have heard learned for the appellant. It could not be successfully argued that the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act have to be complied with in case the Award of the Labour Court holds that the workman would be deemed to be in service for all intents and purposes after rejecting the application for approval of dismissal order. Moreover the main petition is still pending before the learned Single Judge. Therefore, we do not find any ground to interfere in the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. As a sequel to the above discussion, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed. (M.M.KUMAR) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE September 20, 2011 PARAMJIT