Punjab and Haryana High Court raps Haryana for ‘adamant attitude’

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Chandigarh, February 7

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rapped the State of Haryana for its ‘adamant attitude’ and acting in a “most lackadaisical manner” in case of an employee not accorded the benefits of regularisation after completing around 33 years of service.

Coming to his recue, Justice Arun Monga directed that the petitioner’s services would be regularised from the date his juniors were accorded the benefit after observing that none of the defenses put forth by the State of Haryana and other respondents were legally sustainable. The petitioner was also directed to be given consequential monetary benefits, along with seven per cent annual interest, from the due date till payment.

Justice Monga asserted the arrears were restricted to 38 months from the filing of writ petition for regularisation in certain cases. But the petitioner had been running from pillar to post from the date his services were terminated. Though he was later reinstated, consequential benefits were not accorded, compelling him to indulge in multiple rounds of litigation. In his petition, Jagdish through counsel Jagdish Manchanda had contended that he was first hired on January 1, 1988, as a watchman. But his services were summarily terminated after he had put in 15 years unblemished service. The Labour Court vide award dated January 12, 2015, held that the petitioner’s services had indeed been terminated illegally. Resultantly, he was held entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and 50 per cent back wages.

The Labour Court award was upheld by the High Court. Though he was reinstated, full benefits were not given. Justice Monga observed the respondents remained unmoved despite the petitioner’s legal notice, compelling him to approach the High Court in second round of writ petition.

It was disposed after directing the respondents to decide the legal notice by passing a speaking order. But he was merely given part benefit of 50 per cent back wages vide the impugned speaking order dated June 4, 2018.

Taking up the matter, Justice Monga observed the petitioner was before the High Court yet again in what was his third foray after having been compelled to repeatedly litigate with the ‘unrelenting respondents’.

Justice Monga further observed: “It seems that at every step the petitioner was to seek benefits despite the same having been found admissible and as upheld by this Court. His requests were met with resistance by the respondents and their adamant attitude continues.”