BALWAN SINGH SHARMA Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition challenge is to the award dated 8.8.1996, Annexure P-1 passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Faridabad. The challenge is on two counts i.e. one despite the declaration by the Labour Court that the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with benefit of continuity of service, petitioner has not been reinstated and secondly the petitioner was entitled to 100% backwages instead of 10% as awarded by the Labour Court. On notice of the petition learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent stated that since the filing of the petition, petitioner has been reinstated and benefit of continuity of service has been given to him. As regards the claim of the petitioner for 100% backwages, it has been contended by the learned counsel for the respondent that during the period petitioner remained unemployed he worked on 2 acres of land and was also keeping buffaloes for earning his livelihood; so Labour Court had rightly granted 10% backwages. We are not impressed by this argument of the learned counsel for the respondent. To deny full backwages to the petitioner it was incumbent upon the management to prove that during the period petitioner remained unemployed he was gainfully employed. On reading of the statement of the petitioner made before the Labour Court, we find that he never stated that he owns 2 acres of land. In fact he had stated that he had been surviving on 2 bighas of land which he possessed and one or two buffaloes which he was keeping. His statement does not show that the petitioner was gainfully employed. More so, there is no plea of the management that petitioner was gainfully employed during the period he remained unemployed. Consequently, in the circumstances of this case, award dated 8.8.1996 is modified to the extent that petitioner is held entitled to 50 per cent back-wages instead of 10 per cent as granted by the Labour Court.