Jawahar Lal Gupta, J. - (1.) HAS a workman whose' order of termination is set aside by the Labour Court an inviolable right to get full back wages? Petitioners in these three writ petitions viz. 15578 and 16150 of 1991 and No. 8854 of 1992 impugn the awards given by the respective Labour Courts only to the extent that full back wages have not been granted to them. Learned counsel for the parties have referred to the facts as stated in CWP No. 15578 of 1991. These may be briefly noticed.
(2.) THE petitioner -workman avers that he was appointed as an Assistant Black Smith on November 16, 1982 on daily wages. He worked upto May 28, 1983. With effect from June 1, 1983 his services were regularised and he was placed in the scale of Rs. 400 -600. However, his services were terminated on April 29, 1984, without any notice or payment of compensation. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute. The Labour Court by its award dated May 15, 1991 held that the termination of the services of the petitioner was violative of Sections 25F, 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The petitioner was ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service. He was awarded 60 per cent back wages. The denial of full back wages has been impugned by the petitioner. A written statement has been filed on behalf of the employer viz. the General Manager, Punjab Roadways. It has been, inter -alia, averred that the petitioner had been appointed as a Washing Boy against the vacant post of Assistant Black Smith from April 1, 1984. The averment that he had been appointed as Assistant Black Smith has been denied. It has also been denied that he was appointed on November 16, 1982. A copy of the order of appointment has been produced as Annexure R -1 with the written statement. It has been further averred that the services of the petitioner were automatically dispensed with as per terms and conditions incorporated in the order of appointment. On these premises, it has been averred that the petitioner is not entitled to get any back wages and that the award given by the Labour Court deserves to be set aside.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.;