IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

1. LPA-2897-2025 (O&M)

PT MOHAN LAL SANATAN DHARAM PUBLIC SCHOOL … Appellant (s)

V/S

HARJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER ... Respondent(s)

2. LPA-2899-2025 (O&M)

PT MOHAN LAL SANATAN DHARAM PUBLIC SCHOOL … Appellant (s)

V/S

NIRMAL SINGH AND ANOTHER ... Respondent(s)

3. LPA-2900-2025(O&M)

PT MOHAN LAL SANATAN DHARAM PUBLIC SCHOOL … Appellant (s)

V/S

GURDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER ... Respondent(s)

4. LPA-2901-2025 (O&M)

PT MOHAN LAL SANATAN DHARAM PUBLIC SCHOOL … Appellant (s)

V/S

BALDEV SINGH AND ANOTHER ...Respondent(s)

5. LPA-2902-2025 (O&M)

PT MOHAN LAL SANATAN DHARAM PUBLIC SCHOOL … Appellant (s)

V/S

BHIM SINGH AND ANOTHER ... Respondent(s)

The date when the Judgment is reserved 26.09.2025 The date when the Judgment is pronounced 19.12.2025 The date when the judgment is uploaded 23.12.2025

Whether only operative part of the judgment is Full

pronounced or the full judgment has been

pronounced

The delay, if any of the pronouncement of full N.A.

judgment and reasons thereof

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present: Mr. Pawan Kumar Mutneja, Senior Advocate with Mr. Suverna Mutneja, Advocate for the appellant(s).

ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J.

This common order shall dispose of the abovementioned five appeals as common questions of law and facts arise therein. The facts are being taken from LPA No. 2897 of 2025 titled ‘Pt. Mohan Lal Sanatan Dharam Public School Vs. Harjit Singh and another’.

2. The appellant-Pt. Mohan Lal Sanatan Dharam Public School (hereinafter referred to as the ‘management’) has impugned the judgment of the Single Bench whereby the writ petition preferred by respondent No.1-workman (hereinafter referred to as the ‘workman’), has been partly allowed and the compensation awarded to him by the Labour Court has been enhanced from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.25,000/- for each year of service rendered by him.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. Respondent No.1 is stated to have been employed as a Driver with the management on 01.05.2001 and was drawing a salary of Rs.3,400/- per month. His services were terminated vide order dated 05.06.2004. Aggrieved thereagainst, he served a demand notice seeking reinstatement with continuity of service and full back-wages. On 18.11.2004, the industrial dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Labour Court’) for adjudication. Before the Labour Court, it was submitted by the workman that the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1947’) were violated inasmuch as although they had been retrenched on the ground that the “transport services” had been closed but the same was not true. Furthermore, the principle of ‘last come, first go’ had not been followed and he was being victimised for his trade union activities.

3.1. On the contrary, the management had submitted that it is an educational institution and it had decided to dispose of the four school buses and use the proceeds thereof in furtherance of educational services. Accordingly, the buses were sold; the four drivers, including respondent No.1 and one conductor, were relieved and the “transport section” was closed. The “closure compensation” had been paid to respondent No.1 vide cheque dated 05.06.2004, but he had refused to accept the same and it was then sent at his address by registered post. Therefore, the mandate of Section 25FFF had been complied with.

3.2. Vide award dated 06.08.2012, the Labour Court, upon considering the evidence led and hearing the parties, returned the following findings:

i. Initially, four buses were used to transport the students and staff of the school but in 2004, the local transport authority issued certain regulations. Fearing escalation in costs, the management allegedly sold the buses and closed the “transport section”. However, it was found that two of the buses were sold not to a third party but to a sister-institution at Gurdaspur.

ii. The other