State of Punjab & Anr. Vs. Kaku Ram
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 4341 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 8678/2000)
(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 8678/2000)
Petitioner: State of Punjab & Anr.
Respondent: Kaku Ram
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 4341 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 8678/2000)
(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 8678/2000)
Judges: M.B. SHAH & S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jul 31, 2000
Head Note:
SERVICE AND LABOUR LAW
Constitution
Articles 226, 136 – Daily wager in Wild Life Sanctuary – Reinstatement – Full back wages granted – Work only seasonal. Held that order granting full back wages is set aside.
(Paras 6, 7)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Issue notice. Mrs. Rekha Palli, the learned Counsel for the respondent accepts and waives notice.
2. Leave granted.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
4. The State has filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 15.9.1999 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, dismissing the writ petition challenging the award passed by the Labour Court granting reinstatement and full back wages to a daily wager.
5. In this appeal, the learned Counsel for the State has pointed out that the High Court in a previous matter (in CWP No. 6503/92) dealing with the same issue has dismissed the writ petition filed by the workmen. He also pointed out that in any set of circumstances the Labour Court ought not to have granted full back wages to a daily wager.
6. It is true that before the High Court the appellant raised the contention that the activities of the Wild Life Preservation Department were not commercial but for the welfare of the public and , therefore, it would not be an industry. That contention is not pressed at the time of hearing of this appeal. However, the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants that this was not a fit case for grant of full back wages to a workman who is appointed on daily wages, requires to be accepted. Admitted fact is that the workman was not a regularly appointed employee of the Forest Department. Before the Labour Court, it was pointed out that the workman worked for about 5 to 8 months in the Wild Life Sanctuary, Takhani Rehampura, District Hoshiarpur, on daily wages. It was also pointed out that the work given to the employee was seasonal in the Forest Department.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, in our view, the impugned order passed by the Labour Court granting full back wages to the respondent-workman requires to be set aside and is hereby set aside.
8. The appeal is allowed to the above extent with no order as to costs.
1. Issue notice. Mrs. Rekha Palli, the learned Counsel for the respondent accepts and waives notice.
2. Leave granted.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
4. The State has filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 15.9.1999 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, dismissing the writ petition challenging the award passed by the Labour Court granting reinstatement and full back wages to a daily wager.
5. In this appeal, the learned Counsel for the State has pointed out that the High Court in a previous matter (in CWP No. 6503/92) dealing with the same issue has dismissed the writ petition filed by the workmen. He also pointed out that in any set of circumstances the Labour Court ought not to have granted full back wages to a daily wager.
6. It is true that before the High Court the appellant raised the contention that the activities of the Wild Life Preservation Department were not commercial but for the welfare of the public and , therefore, it would not be an industry. That contention is not pressed at the time of hearing of this appeal. However, the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants that this was not a fit case for grant of full back wages to a workman who is appointed on daily wages, requires to be accepted. Admitted fact is that the workman was not a regularly appointed employee of the Forest Department. Before the Labour Court, it was pointed out that the workman worked for about 5 to 8 months in the Wild Life Sanctuary, Takhani Rehampura, District Hoshiarpur, on daily wages. It was also pointed out that the work given to the employee was seasonal in the Forest Department.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, in our view, the impugned order passed by the Labour Court granting full back wages to the respondent-workman requires to be set aside and is hereby set aside.
8. The appeal is allowed to the above extent with no order as to costs.
