IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 16.03.2026 Onkar Singh …Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court and Industrial Tribunal, U.T. Chandigarh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Amit Kaith, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kapil Bansal, DAG, Haryana.

****

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the impugned award dated 13.12.2017 (Annexure P-1), as passed by learned Industrial Tribunal concerned (respondent No.1), the petitioner/workman, was granted the relief of reinstatement with continuity of service and 30% back wages.

2. The petitioner/workman, challenged the legality of the award (supra), to the extent of not granting 100% back wages. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that services of the petitioner/workman was erroneously terminated, and there is a positive finding in this regard that there is non-compliance of Section 25 (F) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the ID Act’). He further submits that the petitioner/workman, was not gainfully employed during his termination period till his reinstatement, and therefore, he is entitled for 100% back wages.

3. Further, reliance