KULDEEP SINGH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent challenges an order dated 2.8.2010 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court disposing of the writ petition filed by the appellant.

(2.) On 21.12.2012, a Division Bench of this Court directed that this appeal be heard alongwith LPA No.754 of 2010; Municipal Council, Dina Nagar Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur and another. LPA No.754 of 2010 alongwith bunch of other similar appeals has been disposed of by us through an order of even date. While disposing of the above referred LPA No.754 of 2010; Municipal Council, Dina Nagar Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur and another alongwith other similar appeals, we have directed that in lieu of reinstatement, the workmen are entitled for compensation.

(3.) In the facts of the present case, the appellant-workman had served the respondent-management for about 4 years. He was a daily-wager. The termination of services of the appellant-workman were challenged by him before the labour Court and the labour Court had held that his service had been terminated in violation of Sec. 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the labour Court did not order reinstatement of the appellant-workman and in lieu thereof, he was awarded compensation of 25,000.00. The appellant workman challenged the said award by the labour Court by filing a writ petition. The learned Single Judge, in the facts and circumstances of the cases, enhanced the compensation from 25,000.00 to 50,000.00. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-workman against the above order passed by the learned Single Judge.