C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 26.03.2010 Smt.Naib Kaur ....Petitioner(s) vs. The State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.S.M.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Addl.A.G., Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.Sanjay Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) By this order, I propose to dispose of six writ petitions i.e. C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 titled as Smt.Naib Kaur vs. The State of Haryana and others, C.W.P.No.14114 of 2009 titled as Gurmeet Singh vs. The State of Haryana and others, C.W.P.No.14115 of 2009 titled as Sohan Lal vs.The State of Haryana and others, C.W.P.No.14116 of 2009 titled as Mohan Lal vs.The State of Haryana and others, C.W.P.No.14117 of 2009 titled as Pawan Kumar vs.The State of Haryana and others and C.W.P.No.14118 of 2009 titled as Som Nath vs.The State of Haryana and others, as counsel for the parties have agreed that similar questions of facts and law are involved in these writ petitions and they can be heard and decided together by single order. C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -2- For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009. The challenge made in the present writ petition is to the Award passed by the Presiding Officer, Ambala wherein reference has been answered against the work-lady holding her not entitled to any claim for the reason that she had failed to prove that she had completed 240 days' continuous service in the 12 preceding months from the date of her termination and also on the ground that no evidence has been led on behalf of the petitioner-worklady with regard to the claim that juniors to her have been retained or taken back in service. Counsel for the petitioner contends that Circular dated 13.5.1997 issued by the Government of Haryana which required the persons employed during the period of strike, as the petitioner, to be taken back in service as per their seniority, had not been given effect to by the respondents. He contends that the services of the petitioner were terminated in violation of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and, therefore, she was entitled to reinstatement in service. He also submits that in a similar type of case taken before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, an undertaking was given by the Municipal Corporation that the employees, who had worked with the Municipal Corporation during the strike period, would be taken back in service as and when the vacancies are available to them. He, on this basis, contends that the Award passed by the Labour Court deserves to be set aside and the petitioner be held entitled to reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits. On the other hand, counsel for respondent No.4-Municipal Corporation, Ambala, submits that on the basis of the evidence led by the C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -3- parties, the Labour Court has come to a conclusion and has returned a finding that the work-lady had failed to prove that she had completed 240 days in service in the 12 preceding months. His further contention is that in the absence of the evidence led by the work-lady that juniors to her were retained or appointments were made of the similarly placed employees after the termination of their services, which factum is disputed by the Management, the finding recorded by the Labour Court is fully justified and does not call for any interference by this Court. As regards Circular dated 13.5.1997 issued by the Government of Haryana, he contends that the said Circular stands withdrawn by the Government of Haryana vide Circular dated 19.2.2007 and, therefore, no benefit can be claimed by the petitioner. He relies upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in C.W.P.No.5280 of 2006 titled as Narender Kumar vs. The Municipal Council, Ambala City and others, decided on 11.3.2008 (Annexure R-2) wherein the decision of the Government of Haryana withdrawing the Circular has been upheld. In view of these submissions, he contends that the Award passed by the Labour Court is fully justified and does not call for any interference by this Court. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. The onus to prove that the work-lady had completed more than 240 days was on the worklady herself which she had failed to discharge. On the basis of the evidence led by the parties, as a matter of fact, a categoric finding has been returned that she has not completed 240 days in service in the 12 preceding months from the date of her termination. That being so, the termination of her services cannot be said to be illegal or not in C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -4- accordance with law. As regards the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the work-lady would be entitled to the benefit under the Circular dated 13.5.1997, suffice it to say that, the said Circular stands withdrawn by the Government of Haryana vide Circular dated 19.2.2007, which decision has also been upheld by this Court in C.W.P.No.5280 of 2006 decided on 11.3.2008. As regards the plea taken by the counsel for the petitioner-work-lady that the juniors to her were retained or who were similarly situated, have been taken back in service by respondent No.4, there again in the absence of any evidence produced before the Labour Court, it had no option but to return a finding against the petitioner-work- lady on this score as well. That being so, the finding as recorded by the Labour Court is in accordance with law which does not call for any interference by this Court. Finding no merit in the present writ petitions, the same stand dismissed. March 26, 2010 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -5- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.14114 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 26.03.2010 Gurmeet Singh ....Petitioner(s) vs. The State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.S.M.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Addl.A.G., Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.Sanjay Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) For orders, see separate detailed order of even date passed in C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 titled as Smt.Naib Kaur vs. The State of Haryana and others. March 26, 2010 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -6- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.14115 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 26.03.2010 Sohan Lal ....Petitioner(s) vs. The State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.S.M.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Addl.A.G., Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.Sanjay Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) For orders, see separate detailed order of even date passed in C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 titled as Smt.Naib Kaur vs. The State of Haryana and others. March 26, 2010 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -7- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.14116 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 26.03.2010 Mohan Lal ....Petitioner(s) vs. The State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.S.M.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Addl.A.G., Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.Sanjay Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) For orders, see separate detailed order of even date passed in C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 titled as Smt.Naib Kaur vs. The State of Haryana and others. March 26, 2010 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -8- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.14117 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 26.03.2010 Pawan Kumar ....Petitioner(s) vs. The State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.S.M.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Addl.A.G., Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.Sanjay Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) For orders, see separate detailed order of even date passed in C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 titled as Smt.Naib Kaur vs. The State of Haryana and others. March 26, 2010 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 -9- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.14118 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 26.03.2010 Som Nath ....Petitioner(s) vs. The State of Haryana and others ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.S.M.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Addl.A.G., Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.Sanjay Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) For orders, see separate detailed order of even date passed in C.W.P.No.14113 of 2009 titled as Smt.Naib Kaur vs. The State of Haryana and others. March 26, 2010 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE