A workman is entitled to wages from the date of an award of reinstatement even if actual re-engagement occurred later, specifically when the employer failed to implement the award and no stay of the reinstatement order was granted by the court during appellate proceedings.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

State feels aggrieved against the order passed by the learned Labour Court -cum- Industrial Tribunal, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. on 16.09.2025 in an application moved by the respondent-workman under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Hence, this writ petition.

In terms of the impugned order, respondent workman has been held entitled to an amount of ₹17,61,560/- towards his full wages from 19.09.2012 (date of award) to 22.02.2019 ( date of re-engagement) alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of the order till realization of the amount.

2. Heard learned Additional Advocate General and considered the case file.

3. The Case

3(i). On an industrial dispute raised by the respondent- workman, the appropriate government sent following reference for adjudication to the learned Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court:-

“Whether termination of the services of Shri Kamal Nath S/o Shri Neeru, by the Executive Engineer, I & P.H Division, Dalhousie, District Chamba, H.P. w.e.f. 26.11.2000 while his juniors have been retained, is proper and justified? If no, what relief, service benefits including seniority and back wages the above workers is entitled to?”

Learned Labour Court adjudicated the reference and passed an award in favour of the respondent-workman on 19.09.2012 as under:-

“…..The retrenchment of the petitioner is set-aside and quashed. The respondent is directed to re-engage the petitioner forthwith. He shall be entitled to the seniority and continuity in service from the date of his illegal termination i.e. 26.11.2K except back wages….”

In terms of the award, retrenchment of the respondent was set-aside. Petitioner was directed to re-engage the respondent-workman forthwith. Respondent-workman was further held entitled to seniority and continuity in service from the date of his illegal termination i.e. 26.11.2000 except back wages.

3(ii). The award was assailed by the petitioner-State in Civil Writ Petition No.4010/2013. The writ petition was dismissed on 06.01.2015. Petitioner-State assailed the judgment dated 06.01.2015 in Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) No. 49/2016. The LPA was also dismissed on 25.04.2016. The Special Leave Petition preferred by the petitioner-State was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 31.08.2018. The award was still not implemented. Respondent- workman filed an application under Section 11(9) of the Act for enforcement of the award. The executing court issued warrants of attachment of moveable property of the department. The petitioner-State thereafter issued order for implementing the award and respondent workman was re-engaged on 22.02.2019 but with immediate effect. Respondent- workman accordingly joined on 23.02.2019. His services were regularized w.e.f. 01.01.2003 to 22.02.2019 on notional basis and w.e.f. 23.02.2019 on actual basis. His pay fixation was also carried out.

3(iii). Respondent-workman moved an application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 asserting that he had appeared before the petitioner-State on 07.08.2013 requesting for his re-engagement in service in view of award passed in his favour on 19.09.2012. However, the then Executive Engineer, I & P.H Division, Dalhousie and other officials of the department had verbally informed him of the department’s inability to do so in terms of award being under challenge. The award having attained finality right till the Hon’ble Apex Court, the respondent- workman claimed re-engagement from the date of award i.e. 19.09.2012 whereas the petitioner-State had re-engaged him w.e.f. 22.02.2019. The respondent workman also claimed actual wages w.e.f. 19.09.2012 (date of award) to 22.02.2019 (date of re-engagement) in terms of the award. The payable wages were al