C.W.P. No. 3409 of 1992 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 3409 of 1992 Date of decision : 28.3.2011 State of Punjab through Director, State Transport,Punjab and another … Petitioners Versus Bua Singh & another … Respondents CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. Navdeep Sukhna, AAG Punjab Mr. B.R.Mahajan, Advocate, for respondent No.1 … ARVIND KUMAR,J: This shall dispose of two writ petitions, namely, CWP Nos. 3409 of 1992 and 3140 of 1992. Civil Writ Petition No. 3409 of 1992 has been preferred by the department challenging award dated 23.10.1990 passed by the Labour Court Gurdaspur, whereby the workman has been ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service along with 50 per cent back-wages. Civil Writ Petition No. 3140 of 1992 has been preferred by the workman challenging award dated 23.10.1990 to the extent he has been granted half of the back-wages and the prayer is, therefore, for grant of full back-wages. The case of the workman Bua Singh is that he was appointed as Conductor on 1.4.1982. He continuously worked as such till 6.8.1984 when his services were terminated illegally without complying with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act (in short, C.W.P. No. 3409 of 1992 2 the Act). The Department after having taken some preliminary objections, pleaded that the appointment of the workman was purely on temporary basis for a specific period. He worked as Clock Room Attendant, the post which was abolished. The learned Labour Court after analysing the evidence adduced before it by both the parties, held that the termination of services of the workman is not justified and is in violation of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act ibid which are mandatory in nature and consequently, ordered reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service along with 50 per cent back-wages vide its award dated 23.10.1990. Hence, the present two writ petitions, one by the department and the other by the workman. Counsel for the parties have been heard. Counsel for the department has not been able to show anything from the record that the workman had not completed 240 days preceding 12 calendar months from the date of his termination from service; rather on the documentary evidence, the averment of the workman indicates that he had completed said 240 days. Thus, on account of non-compliance of Section 25-F of the Act, the termination of the workman was rightly held to be illegal and not sustainable. Nothing has been impressed upon this Court to take any contrary view. The residual question relates to the payment of back- wages. The payment of back-wages is a discretionary power which has to be exercised keeping in view the facts and circumstances of each case and neither strait-jacket formula can be evolved nor a rule of universal application can be adopted. In Allahabad Jal Sansthan v. Daya Shankar Rai and another, 2005(5) SCC-124, it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that it is necessary to develop a pragmatic approach to problems dogging industrial relations. However, no just solution can be offered, but a golden mean may be arrived at, and opined that interest of justice would be subserved if the workman is awarded 50 per cent of back-wages. Therefore, keeping in view the said ratio, the grant of 50 per cent back-wages in this case is fair enough. In view of what has been stated above, the learned Labour Court has rightly answered the reference. There is no infirmity in the award passed by the Labour Court which is just and reasoned. C.W.P. No. 3409 of 1992 3 Accordingly, both the writ petitions, namely, CWP Nos. 3409 of 1992 and 3140 of 1992, being without any merit are dismissed. March 28, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE