IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision :04.02.2025 Vinay Gupta ...Petitioner Versus The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Patiala and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: Mr. Raj Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mukul Aggarwal, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4.

* * *

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

1. In the present petition, challenge is against the award dated 02.09.2013 (Annexure P/8) passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Patiala on the ground that the compensation awarded is inadequate in contrast to the length of service rendered by the petitioner-Workman

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Tribunal while adjudicating upon the issue has kept in view the totality of circumstances and the evidence which have come on record and as such, the compensation has already been awarded by the Tribunal hence, the plea that the same is inadequate, may kindly be rejected.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

4. The question as to how the compensation should be assessed in view of the reinstatement,