C.W.P. No.11206 of 2001 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.11206 of 2001 Date of Decision: 05.10.2009 Dalbir Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents Present: Mr. Pawan Khatak, Advocate for Mr. Raman B. Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.S. Nalwa, Addl. A.G., Haryana for respondents No.1 to 3. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petition is for a direction by a mandamus to implement the award passed by the Labour Court, Panipat and in the alternative to initiate prosecution against the 3rd respondent for breach of the award under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act. There is also a prayer for a direction to pay the wages. 2. It is stated by learned counsel appearing for the State that the workman has been reinstated as per terms of the award. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also concedes the same. Sh. Nalwa, learned State counsel produced before me a letter from the Labour Commissioner that shows that sanction to prosecute has also been issued on 02.08.2001 for non-implementation of the award. The said communication also reveals that the Labour Inspector Jind has C.W.P. No.11206 of 2001 -2- filed a complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Jind for prosecution. 3. In view of the events that have been brought before me, there is no need for issuing any orders in the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner-workman states that some wages are still due and payable. Although, the workman could have had his remedy for payment of back wages by an independent application under Section 33 C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, now that the writ petition had been admitted and the respondents are represented through counsel, I would only think that even without having to direct the workman to apply to the Labour Court again under Section 33C (2), the third respondent shall pay all the back wages, if they had not been paid. The workman shall also be entitled to make a proper representation giving out the details of the months when he has not been paid his wages, which shall be considered and the 3rd respondent shall pass appropriate orders relating to the payment of back wages within two months from the date of representation. 4. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 05, 2009 Pankaj*