C.W.P. No. 328 of 1991 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 328 of 1991 Date of decision: 1.12.2010 State of Punjab and others ..............Petitioner Versus Shinder Pal Singh and another ................Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI Present: Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab None for the respondent RANJAN GOGOI,J.(oral) Heard Shri Suvir Sehgal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab learned counsel for the petitioner. The challenge in the writ petition is against the award dated 18.5.1990 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Amritsar in Reference case No. 103 of 1984 reinstating the respondent-workman with back wages w.e.f. 5.1.1984. A reading of the interim order dated 8.4.1991 passed by this Court makes it clear that the respondent had been re-instated in service. By the said interim order, the award in sofar as back wages is concerned was declined to be stayed by this court. The court can reasonably proceed on the basis that on account of the aforesaid interim order of the court the back wages of the workman must have been paid. The respondent has been in service, after reinstatement, for nearly two decades. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been instructed as to whether the respondent-workman is still in service or he has C.W.P. No. 328 of 1991 2 retired. As the respondent has been re-instated and is in service for over 20 years, this court is of the view that it will be highly inequitable to disturb the said position even assuming the petitioner is entitled to succeed on merits. The same would hold good for the back wages received by the workman who cannot, in any case, be asked to surrender the same at this belated stage. In so far as the merit of the impugned award is concerned, it has been found by the learned Labour Court that the service of the workman was terminated on an allegation of embezzlement of Rs.10.40 p and that no enquiry was held and no opportunity was afforded to the workman. The aforesaid findings of the Learned Labour Court remain unassailable on the pleadings made and arguments advanced. Taking into account the aforesaid facts, this court is of the view that the ultimate order of the court in the writ petition has to be in favour of the respondent-workman. The writ petition, therefore, is dismissed. (RANJAN GOGOI) JUDGE December 1, 2010 RSK NOTE : Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes/No