- (1.) CHALLENGE in the present writ petition is to the order dated 31.10.2013 (Annexure P -1) whereby, the claim of the petitioner for back wages in pursuance of the award dated 29.09.1995 was rejected by the Industrial Tribunal, Ludhiana.
(2.) A perusal of the paper book would go on to show that vide award dated 29.09.1995, the petitioner was directed to be reinstated with the respondent -management but regarding back wages, he was given liberty to file his claim under Section 33 -C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short 'the Act').
(3.) IT is not disputed that in pursuance of the award, the workman was taken back in service and he joined on 11.06.1997. However, the workman chose not to file the application till the year 2003 and then the application was filed claiming a sum of Rs. 2,64,647/ -. It is also not disputed that the workman was working as a Beldar and was only getting salary of Rs. 620/ - per month when his services were terminated. In the evidence which was led in his cross examination, it came forth that he was doing labour work and earning sufficient money for his survival and he had not searched for any job after his termination. Accordingly, the relief was declined on the ground that he had been gainfully employed. The finding recorded by the Labour Court reads as under: - "On hearing the parties and considering the evidence on record, I find the applicant not entitled to any back wages because a terminated workman, who has got no employment or has not been gainfully employed during the period of his termination, only, is entitled to back wages, but in the present case, the workman remained gainfully employed and has been working in order to maintain himself and his family. This fact has been in clear terms admitted by the workman during his cross -examination appearing as AW -1 and that the disentitles him to the back wages claimed. These issues are decided against the applicant. (Relief): 10) In view of my findings on the issues above, the applicant is not entitled to any relief. The application is dismissed. No order as to costs. File be consigned to record room." Resultantly, the present writ petition has been filed. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that once he was reinstated, he was entitled for the back wages for his wrongful termination as a matter of right and, therefore, the order passed by the Labour Court was not justified.;