IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.542 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 21.01.2009 Dalbir Singh ....Petitioner(s) vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hisar and anr. ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.B.R.Vohra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Addl.A.G., Haryana. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) In the present writ petition, challenge is to the award dated 14.2.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar wherein the counsel for the petitioner contends that the Court has, without going into the merits of the case or discussing the evidence which has been produced by the parties, proceeded to decide the matter without returning a finding as regards the period for which the workman has worked and whether there is any violation of the provisions as claimed to have been violated by the workman. He further contends that even if the workman is not held entitled to reinstatement, nevertheless in the light of the judgments passed by this Court, he would be entitled to compensation for the period he had worked with the respondent. Counsel for the respondent submits that although there is no finding with regard to the period he has worked with the respondents but C.W.P.No.542 of 2009 -2- still in the light of the fact that he is a daily wage worker and , therefore, his appointment would be covered under exception (bb) to Section 2 (oo) of the Act and it would not amount to retrenchment, meaning thereby that no useful purpose would be served even if a finding with regard to the period he had to be treated in service would have been given. The submission as put forth by the counsel for the respondent may be correct but that always is dependent on the facts and circumstances of each case. Law has to be applied not in isolation or has not to be enforced into without looking into the facts and giving a finding and that too from a Court of original jurisdiction. The requirement of law is that the original Court of jurisdiction must on the basis of the evidence produced before it, on framing issues first give a finding on such issues and thereafter proceed to decide the same in accordance with law. This having not been done in the present case, the impugned award dated 14.2.2008 (Annexue P- 3) cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded to the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar to decide the same in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Labour Court on 27.2.2009. This writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. January 21, 2009 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE