{"id":218899,"date":"2009-03-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009"},"modified":"2018-01-13T02:15:15","modified_gmt":"2018-01-12T20:45:15","slug":"mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009<\/div>\n
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA\n                      AT CHANDIGARH\n\n                                            C.M. No. 5111 of 2009 and\n                                            C.W.P. No. 21109 of 2008.\n                                         Date of Decision : March 23, 2009.\n\n\nMahender.                                            ...... Petitioner.\n\n                                  Versus.\n\nPresiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar,\nand another.                                            ..... Respondents.<\/pre>\n
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.<\/p>\n
Present:-    Mr. J.P. Dhull, Advocate,\n             for the petitioner.\n\n             Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate,\n             for the respondent No. 2.\n\nAUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL).\n\nC.M. No. 5111 of 2009.\n\n<\/pre>\n
             This application is for placing on record the written statement on<\/p>\n
behalf of respondent No.2.\n<\/p>\n
             Application is allowed.\n<\/p>\n
             Written statement is taken on record.\n<\/p>\n
C.W.P. No. 21109 of 2008.\n<\/p>\n
             In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the award dated<\/p>\n
28.02.2008 (Annexure-P-1), passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour<\/p>\n
Court, Hisar, vide which the reference has been answered against the<\/p>\n
petitioner-workman.\n<\/p>\n
             Counsel for the petitioner-workman states that the petitioner-<\/p>\n
workman has put in service of more than 240 days in the 12 preceding
\n C.W.P. No. 21109 of 2008.                                                -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
months which is an admitted fact and finding to that effect has been given by<\/p>\n
the Labour Court. He contends that even if it is held that the petitioner-<\/p>\n
workman would not be held entitled to the reinstatement in the light of the<\/p>\n
fact that it was a public post which was not made in accordance with the<\/p>\n
statutory rules and the petitioner-workman in the light of the judgment of the<\/p>\n
Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Haryana Versus Ishwar<\/p>\n
Singh and another, 2008(3) S.C.T. 788, would be entitled to compensation<\/p>\n
alone.\n<\/p>\n
               Counsel for the respondent-management on the other hand<\/p>\n
contends that he was a daily wager and he was performing his duties as a<\/p>\n
daily wager all through, therefore, the provisions of Section 25-F of the<\/p>\n
Industrial Disputes Act would not attracted in the present case. He relies<\/p>\n
upon the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Batala<\/p>\n
Cooperative Sugar Mill Limited Versus Sowaran Singh, 2006 (1) R.S.J.<\/p>\n
758.     He further relies upon the judgment of this Court in the case of<\/p>\n
Director, Central Sheep Breeding Farm, Hisar Versus President, District<\/p>\n
Agriculture Workers Union, Hisar, and another, as well as Division Bench<\/p>\n
judgment of this Court in the case of Executive Engineer H.U.D.A.<\/p>\n
Gurgaon Versus Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour<\/p>\n
Court, Gurgaon, and another, in support of his contentions.<\/p>\n
               I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the<\/p>\n
records of the case. The admitted position as is apparent from the impugned<\/p>\n
award is that the petitioner-workman has indeed put in 240 days prior to his<\/p>\n
termination.     It is also not in dispute that the petitioner-workman was<\/p>\n
appointed in September,2000, and continued in service till April, 2003. The<\/p>\n
judgments as relied upon by counsel for the respondent did hold field but in
\n C.W.P. No. 21109 of 2008.                                                -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
subsequent judgments, Hon’ble the Supreme Court while considering these<\/p>\n
aspects has come to the conclusion that where there is violation of<\/p>\n
Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act even in case of daily wagers<\/p>\n
although they would not be entitled to reinstatement in the light of fact that<\/p>\n
the appointment was not in consonance with the statutory requirements or in<\/p>\n
violation of the mandate of the constitution for making appointment on<\/p>\n
public post but still for the reason that the workman had indeed worked with<\/p>\n
the respondents and the appointment was made by the management in<\/p>\n
violation of the statutory rules, held him entitled to compensation in lieu of<\/p>\n
the reinstatement in service.     Reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble the<\/p>\n
Supreme Court in the        Telecom District Manager and Others Versus<\/p>\n
Kesheb Deb, 2008 (4) S.C.T. 33, and thereafter, judgment of Division Bench<\/p>\n
this High Court in the case State of Haryana Versus Ishwar Singh and<\/p>\n
another, 2008(3) S.C.T. 788, can be placed.\n<\/p>\n
               In the present writ petition, the petitioner-workman has put in<\/p>\n
service of 2 years and 9 months with the respondent-management, he is held<\/p>\n
entitled to compensation of Rs. 30,000\/- to balance equities between the<\/p>\n
parties.\n<\/p>\n
               Direction is issued to the respondent-management to make the<\/p>\n
payment of compensation amount within a period of two months from the<\/p>\n
date of receipt of copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n
               In this view of the matter, the present writ petition stands<\/p>\n
disposed of.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                         (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)
\n                                                  JUDGE
\nMarch 23, 2009.\n<\/p>\n
sjks.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 5111 of 2009 and C.W.P. No. 21109 of 2008. Date of Decision : March 23, 2009. Mahender. …… Petitioner. Versus. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar, and another. ….. Respondents. CORAM: HON’BLE […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-218899","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-12T20:45:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-12T20:45:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":663,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-12T20:45:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-12T20:45:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-12T20:45:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009"},"wordCount":663,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009","name":"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-12T20:45:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-vs-presiding-officer-on-23-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mahender vs Presiding Officer on 23 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218899","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=218899"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218899\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=218899"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=218899"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=218899"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}