IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 6786 of 2009 Date of decision: 3.5.2011 P.S.E.B.,Patiala and another … Petitioners versus Anil Kumar … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Ms. Madhu Dayal, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Ranjivan Singh, Advocate, for the respondent ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioner, Punjab State Electricity Board was the defendant in the suit for declaration titled Anil Kumar v. PSEB and others seeking re-appointment as daily wager with the defendant-Board. The suit was dismissed on 10.5.2001. An appeal was filed. Lower appellate Court partly allowed the appeal and the judgment and decree of the trial Court was modified holding that in case any vacancy of daily-wage worker is available with the defendant-Board, then the case of the appellant for re- employment as daily-wage worker be considered on the basis of his seniority subject to the condition that he fulfils other pre-requisite condition of said employment and is even otherwise physically capable to do the said job. In the execution petition, it transpired that one Kirpal Singh was issued appointment letter by the Additional Superintending Engineer, PSEB, Mohali, ignoring Anil Kumar and said Kirpal Singh is still working. It came to the notice of the Court that the decree-holder has not been re- employed and thus, observing that the respondent-department is not implementing the judgment of the lower appellate Court in true spirit, gave directions to consider the name of Anil Kumar for re-employment as C.R. No. 6786 of 2009 -2- daily wage worker considering his seniority as per judgment dated 20.5.2005 if the vacancy exists, failing which the property of the JDs was ordered to be attached for six months. Hence, this revision by the Board. The executing Court vide impugned order dated 3.6.2009 while disposing of the application under Order 21 rule 32, Code of Civil Procedure, has observed as indicated above mainly on the ground that one Kirpal Singh was appointed and not Anil Kumar despite the above-said directions given by the lower appellate Court in the appeal. However, the present petitioner has placed on record affidavit of Er.Ashwani Kumar, Senior Executive Engineer(Operation), stating that no daily wager has been appointed in the office after 20.5.2005 till date. On enquiry as to what transpired for giving appointment to Kirpal Singh, another affidavit of said Ashwani Kumar has been placed on record indicating that said Kirpal Singh was given appointment as per orders of the Labour Court, Patiala. In view of the said stand, there was no occasion for the Court below to have passed such a coercive order for the attachment of the property of the JDs for a period of six months. The same is set aside. However, counsel for the petitioners has given an assurance that the moment the vacancy of daily- wage worker arises, judgment of the lower appellate Court dated 20.5.2005 would be given effect to. In this back-drop of the facts, the present revision petition stands disposed of in the manner indicated above. May 3, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE