CWP No.1166 of 2007 4.7.2008 Present: Mr. G.R.Palsra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.K.Thakur, Advocate for the respondents. By medium of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the award dated 14.6.2007. Mr. G.R.Palsra, Advocate has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure P-4 to substantiate his plea that the workman in fact had completed 240 days in a block of 12 Calendar months preceding his retrenchment. He further contended that since his client had completed 240 days preceding his retrenchment, his retrenchment was bad in law. In fact, this position has not been disputed by the respondents in the reply. When the matter was listed yesterday, a fair proposal had come from the employer that the workman can be offered re-instatement but he had to forgo his back wages. Mr. G.R.Palsra, on the basis of the instructions imparted to him, by his client submits that in case his client is re-instated in service, he will not claim back wages. Mr. N.K.Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Corporation has placed on record a copy of communication dated 3.7.2008 reiterating more or less the same stand as observed by this Court in the earlier portion of the judgment. The letter is permitted to be taken on record. Consequently, the award dated 14.6.2007 is quashed and set- aside with the consent of the parties. The employer i.e. H.R.T.C. is directed to re-instate the petitioner within seven days. The petitioner will report to the Managing Director of the respondent-Corporation with the certified copy of this judgment to facilitate the process of his joining. It is clarified that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any back wages, however, he will be entitled to seniority. In view of these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Copy ‘Dasti’ July 4, 2008(gr) (Rajiv Sharma),J.