IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.16033 of 2008
Date of decision : 9th September, 2008
Satya Devi
... Petitioner
Versus
Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Present : Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J.
Present writ petition has been filed by Smt. Satya Devi
(hereinafter referred to as, ‘workman’), impugning the award dated
07.08.2007 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Labour Court, Ambala, whereby
prayer of the petitioner-workman for reinstatement in service has been
declined and it has been held that the management was justified to
terminate the services of the petitioner-workman.
Brief facts can be taken from the writ petition, wherein it has
been stated that petitioner-workman was appointed as Anganwari worker
on 25th August, 1994. According to the petitioner-workman, her services
were regularized on 24th April, 1996 but the management terminated her
services on 9th December, 1996. Petitioner had approached Labour Court
and an award was passed on 05.09.2002, whereby she was reinstated in
Civil Writ Petition No.16033 of 2008 2
service with continuity, however, management was afforded an opportunity
to terminate the services of the petitioner-workman after complying with the
due procedure. Petitioner-workman claimed that she submitted her joining
report on 07.02.2003 but she was not allowed to join her duty.
Subsequently, petitioner-workman was allowed to join her duties on
29.04.2003. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued by the
management on 14.05.2003. A reply was submitted to the show cause
notice and services of the petitioner-workman were terminated on
10.09.2003. Petitioner-workman raised a demand notice, on the basis of
which, a reference was made by the State of Haryana to the Labour Court.
In pursuance of the reference, Labour Court noticed the contention of the
management that the petitioner-workman was not eligible to be posted as
Anganwari worker at village Saini Majra, as she had obtained the job of
Anganwari worker by producing forged/ false domicile/ residence
certificate. It has been further averred that vide award dated 05.09.2002,
management was granted opportunity to terminate services of the
petitioner, if so advised, after following the due procedure by the competent
authority.
Learned Labour Court noticed that award dated 05.09.2002
had become final between the parties as none of the parties had
challenged the award in higher Court of law. Labour Court held that award
dated 05.09.2002 (Ex.MW/17) leave no course open to assail the present
termination. Findings of the award dated 05.09.2002 (Ex.MW/17) in para
13, which has been reproduced by the Labour Court, read as under:
“Workman herself admitted that she belongs to Amritsar
and is married in Sujanpur (Pathankot) Punjab. Nagar Mal her
husband is posted as Head Master in village Baknor, Distt.
Ambala. In the year 1994 he was posted at Sonta but used to
live in a rented house at Ambala City. She had taken a house
Civil Writ Petition No.16033 of 2008 3on rent from Smt. Surjito at village Saini Majra and used to life
in it. Workman when herself admits that she is a permanent
resident of Amritsar (Punjab) and was married at Sujanpur
(Pathankot) no dispute remains about it. Merely that she took
a house on rent at village Saini Majra and used to live there
for the last about ½ years won’t make her a permanent
resident of that village. It is strange to see as to how she got
the domicile certificate issued showing her a permanent
resident of that village i.e. Saini Majra. Not only this, she got
an another domicile certificate, issued from the concerned
authority i.e. SDO (Civil), Ambala, showing herself a
permanent resident of village Rattangarh. This shows that the
certificates were issued in the routine without making any
enquiries and observing the required formalities. Workman
was not a permanent resident of village Saini Majra so she
was not eligible to be posted as Anganwari worker there. She
got the domicile certificate issued falsely, illegally and got the
job. The management rightly and legally terminated her
services, after seeking her explanation. But the order,
impugned cannot sustain because it was not passed by the
appointing authority. Workman was appointed by the Director,
Women & Child Development Department, Haryana
Chandigarh as is evident from the appointment letter dated
29.2.1996 Ex.M-1 but her services were dispensed with by the
Programme Officer, Ambala. This is clear from the order dated
4.12.1996 Ex.M-4. The P.O. was not the appointing authority
of the workman. Only the Director, Women & Child
Development Department was competent to remove the
workman from the service and not the authority below her
rank.”Labour Court also noticed para 14 and 16 of the award dated
05.09.2002 and held as under:
“Therefore, in the light of the aforesaid definite findings,
observations and direction of the Labour Court, Ambala as
contained in its final award dated 5.9.02 Ex.MW/17, the limited
Civil Writ Petition No.16033 of 2008 4scope which is left before this Court is to see as to whether
the management has terminated the services of the present
petitioner for the second time vide impugned order dated
10.9.03 in accordance with the spirit of the award dated 5.9.02
Ex.MW/17, in question passed by the Labour Court or not.”
During the course of arguments, counsel for the petitioner has
admitted that award dated 05.09.2002 was not challenged. Since the
award dated 05.09.2002 had attained finality and it has come in evidence
that petitioner had obtained the job, to which she was not entitled, on the
basis of a fake/ fabricated document, this Court cannot come to the rescue
of the petitioner-workman.
Hence, the present writ petition is dismissed.
[HEMANT GUPTA] [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE JUDGE
September 09, 2008.
rps