PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. GURVINDER SINGH AND ANR.
LAWS(P&H)-2008-2-271
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 07,2008

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Appellant
VERSUS
Gurvinder Singh And Anr. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

K.C. Puri, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in this Civil Writ Petition is to the award dated 24.9.1996, Annexure P10, passed by the Labour Court, Jalandhar vide which reference made by Gurvinder Singh, workman was answered in his favour and he was reinstated into service with continuity of service.
(2.) THE workman pleaded that he was in regular employment of petitioner as work charge at Behram Sub Division No. 1, Punjab State Electricity Board. Due to heavy floods, he went on leave from 2.7.1993 to 7.7.1993. He found that his house -hold articles had been washed away by the floods. He received letter dated 13.7.1993 from the petitioner to which he sent reply by registered post on 23.7.1993. Thereafter he reported for duty on 26.7.1993 but he was not allowed to join duty. His services were illegally terminated. The Punjab State Electricity Board admitted that the workman joined duty under Sub Divisional Officer, Behram Sub Division, Sub Division of Banga Division on 21.7.1992 as R.T.M by procuring office order No. 1050 dated 22.6.1992. He also produced No Demand Certificate. The office order and No Demand Certificate were of doubtful authenticity. So, the office order was referred to the Director (Personnel), P.S.E.B, Patiala and No Demand Certificate was referred to the Sub Divisional Officer, Sujanpur. The Director (Personnel) vide his memo No. 36480/GN -159 dated 19.7.1993 and No. 11047 dated 30.7.1993 intimated that the said office order had not been issued by him. Similarly, S.D.O, Sujanpur vide his memo No. 3130 dated 24.9.1993 also wrote that No Demand Certificate was not issued by him and that the workman never worked in that Sub Division. Therefore, there was no valid contract of employment between the parties as no appointment offer was given to the workman by the management and hence the reference was not maintainable.
(3.) THE learned Labour Court framed the following issues: 1. Whether termination of service of the workman concerned is justified and in order?OPR. 2. Relief. Returning the finding on issue No. 1 in favour of the workman, he was ordered to be reinstated with full back wages. I have heard arguments of both sides and have gone through the record of the case.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.