Exe.Engineer,Water
Services Div.Haryana Vs. Kartar Singh [2009] INSC 585 (23 March 2009)
Judgment
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1795 OF 2009 (Arising out
of SLP(C) No. 9587 of 2008) Executive Engineer, Water Services Div. Haryana
...Appellant VERSUS Kartar Singh ..Respondent
ORDER
1.
Delay
condoned.
2.
Leave
granted.
3.
This
appeal is filed against the Judgment and Order of the High Court of Punjab and
Haryana in CWP No. 8127 of 2007, by which the writ petition was dismissed which
was filed against an award passed by the Labour Court, Rohtak directing the reinstatement
of the respondent in service and payment of back wages to the extent of 50 per
cent.
4.
The
respondent was appointed as a Chaukidar on daily wages but his services were
terminated, for which reference was made before the Labour Court as to whether
the termination was legal or not. In that factual background, the aforesaid
award was passed by the Labour Court directing the reinstatement of the
respondent into service and also payment of the wages to the extent of 50%.
5.
While
entertaining the Special Leave Petition, this Court, on 28th of March, 2006,
passed the following order :- "Issue notice limited to the question of
back wages.
Issue notice on the
application for condonation of delay also."
6.
So
far as the application for condonation of delay as noted herein earlier, we
have already condoned the delay of 166 days in filing this 2 Special Leave
Petition as we find that the statements made in the application for condonation
of delay do constitute sufficient cause in condoning the delay. Therefore, the
only question remains to be decided is what should be the appropriate back
wages to be paid to the respondent.
7.
We
have heard the learned counsel for the parties and considered the submissions
made on behalf of the learned counsel for the parties on the question of
payment of back wages.
8.
In
our view, since the respondent has already been reinstated in service and
considering the fact that there was no plea nor any evidence or proof to show
that from the alleged discontinuation of his engagement till the date of the
award, the respondent was not in gainful employment, we are of the view that
instead of payment of 50% of the back 3 wages, the award may be modified to
the extent that the respondent shall be entitled to 25% of the back wages.
9.
Accordingly,
the order of the High Court and the award in question is modified to the above
extent.
10.
The
appellant is directed to pay 25% of the back wages from the date of award i.e.
5th of March, 2004 within four months from this date. The appeal is allowed to
the extent indicated above. There will be no order as to costs.
.........................J.
[Tarun Chatterjee]
New
Delhi;
.....................
....J.
Back
