C.W.P.No.12937 of 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.12937 of 2002 Date of Decision:02.04.2008 Superintendent of Police, Karnal .....Petitioner versus Laxman Yadav and another .....Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr.D.S.Nalwa, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for the petitioner. Mr.Naveen Daryal, Advocate, for respondent No.1. *** ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(Oral) The Superintendent of Police, Karnal has filed this writ petition impugning the award dated 24.10.2001 passed by the Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Panipat vide which termination of the services of the respondent-workman has been held to be illegal and he has been ordered to be re-instated with continuity of service and full back-wages. The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Police Department is not an industry and does not come within the meaning of Section 2(J) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the functions of the Police Department are sovereign in nature and hence, is not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Labour Court. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 however submits that the Labour Court did not frame any issue as to whether the Police C.W.P.No.12937 of 2002 2 Department is an industry or not and hence, the petitioner cannot agitate this point now in the writ petition. A perusal of the reply to the demand notice (Annexure P-8) shows that in preliminary objection No.3, the petitioner had categorically averred “that the subject matter pleaded in the demand notice is not covered under the Industrial Disputes Act”. Once the aforementioned objection has been raised on behalf of the petitioner, it was incumbent for the Labour Court to frame an issue and should have decided the same. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that the Police Department performs sovereign and regal functions of the State and, therefore, cannot be subjected to the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. The arguments of the learned counsel for the respondent that the case should be remanded back is again rejected as it would be futile exercise to ask the Labour Court to determine whether the Police Department is an industry or not. In view of the fact that the Police Department is not an industry, therefore, we allow the writ petition and set aside the impugned award (Annexure P-11) dated 24.10.2001. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the workman has been re-instated in service and his service has been regularised. In case, service of the workman has been regularised, then the respondent may continue in service in accordance with law but he would not be entitled to any back-wages. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE April 02, 2008 (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) seema JUDGE