COCP No.1642 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.1642 of 2008 Date of decision: February 12, 2009 Dr Joseph K.Masih …..PETITIONER Versus Dr A.S.Bindra, Managing Director, P.M.L.Industries Ltd. and another …..RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN PRESENT: Petitioner in person. Mr Anil K.Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondents. T.P.S.MANN, J. (Oral): Award given by the Labour Court, Patiala on 18.10.2001 was challenged by the respondents by filing CWP No.10377 of 2008. The same came for motion hearing before a Division Bench of this Court on 3.6.2008, when notice of motion was issued and till the next date, execution of award was directed to remain stayed, subject to compliance of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). After appearance of the petitioner, the writ petition was disposed of on 16.9.2008 by quashing the award dated 18.10.2001, as well as the order dated 30.4.2008. The parties were directed to appear before learned Labour Court, Patiala for further proceedings in accordance with law. However, it was observed that it would be open to the workman to seek recovery of the last drawn wages in terms of the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act from the date of filing of the writ petition till that day i.e. 16.9.2008 in COCP No.1642 of 2008 2 appropriate proceedings. The present petition has been filed by the workman for punishing the respondents for willfully disobeying the order dated 3.6.2008 for not complying with the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act. Reply has been filed by the respondents today in the Court, which is taken on the record. A copy of the same has been supplied to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondents states that the last drawn pay has since been paid to the petitioner and therefore, the order dated 3.6.2008, which was later on clarified by the Division Bench on 16.9.2008 while disposing of the writ petition stands complied with. The petitioner has not disputed the fact of the payment made to him, but states that he was entitled to the payment of last drawn wages from the date of the award and not from the date of passing of the order dated 3.6.2008. In this regard, he has placed reliance upon Dena Bank vs Kirti Kumar, 1999 (2) SCC 106, Regional Authority, Dena Bank vs Ghanshyam, 2001 (5) SCC 169, Indra Perfumery Co. vs Presiding Officer & others, 2004 (3) SCT 66, Gram Panchayat Manoharpur vs Ashok Kumar Sharma, 2007 (4) SCT 526, Sahara Air Lines vs Khosla 2008 (3) S.C.T 212 and M/s Ramniranjan Kedia Tourism Service vs. Tilak Raj & others,, 2008 (4) S.C.T 189. There is no dispute with the proposition of law settled in the aforementioned judgments. However, it is a matter of fact that while disposing of Civil Writ Petition on 16.9.2008, the Division Bench left it open to the workman to seek recovery of the last drawn wages in terms of the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act from the date of filing of the writ COCP No.1642 of 2008 3 petition up till that day i.e. 16.9.2008. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that the respondents have violated the order requiring them to comply with the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act. The petitioner states that he has already challenged the order dated 16.9.2008 by filing a special leave petition in the Hon’ble Supreme Court but the same has not been listed for hearing as yet. As the order requiring the compliance of the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act has been complied with by the respondents in terms of order dated 16.9.2998 passed in CWP No.10377 of 2008, there is no merit in the present petition, which is, accordingly, disposed of. Rule is discharged. However, it would be open to the petitioner to get the present petition revived, in case, he obtains any relief in the special leave petition from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, especially, in regard to compliance of the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act. February 12, 2009 (T.P.S.MANN) Pds. JUDGE