IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : February 11, 2026 THE JIND COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD., JIND -PETITIONER V/S THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, PANIPAT AND ANR.

-RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Ankur Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. H.N. Sahu, Advocate for the respondent No.2.

***

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant writ petition wraps a challenge to the award dated 18.10.2000, passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Panipat, whereby the reference made under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “the I.D. Act”) was answered in favour of the respondent No.2-workman. Vide the impugned award, the Industrial Tribunal directed reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service and full back wages with effect from the date of the demand notice, i.e. 01.12.1993.

2. Concisely and compendiously, the workman raised an industrial dispute through demand notice dated 01.12.1993, followed by a statement of claim dated 09.12.1994, asserting that he was appointed as a Runner Kamdar with the petitioner-management on 21.05.1990 at rates fixed by the Deputy Commissioner, Jind. It was averred that he rendered continuous service up to 06.05.1991, when his services were illegally terminated. The workman further pleaded that he was temporarily re- engaged by the management on a seasonal basis from 28.10.1991 to April

1992 and again from October 1992 to March 1993.

3. The management, in its written statement, contended that the workman had last worked only from 08.11.1992 to 17.03.1993 and had not completed 240 days of service in the relevant year. It was further asserted that his engagement was purely seasonal in nature. Upon consideration of the pleadings and evidence adduced by the parties, the Industrial Tribunal passed the impugned award directing reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.

4. It is apposite to record here that during the pendency of the instant writ petition, the workman was reinstated in service by the management. Subsequently, upon attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from service and was granted consequential retiral benefits. It is also stated that his services stood regularized. In view of the supervening developments, the controversy now survives only with respect to the validity of the award insofar as it grants full back wages.

5. Learned counsel for the management submits that, apart from a bald assertion in the statement of claim that the workman was not able to get any other employment, no cogent evidence was led to substantiate such plea. It is contended that in the absence of specific pleading and proof regarding non-gainful employment during the intervening period, the grant of full back wages is legally unsustainable.

6. It is further submitted that while determining entitlement to back wages, certain crucial aspects need to be taken into consideration, such as, manner and method of selection, nature of appointment, i.e. whether ad hoc, short term, daily wage, temporary or permanent, length of service etc. Not just that, the issue in question is also required to be evaluated on the anvil of principles of equity, justice and good conscience. The mere order of reinstatement does not automatically entitle the workman to 100% back wages. In this regard, reliance is placed upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in U.P.S.R.T.C. Vs. Mitthu Singh, 2006 (7) SCC 180 wherein, it was held that there cannot be any thumb rule in every case, where order of reinstatement is passed that the employee is entitled to full back wages:-

“10. In General Manager, Haryana Roadways v. Rudhan Singh,2005 (3) SCT 559: 2005 (5) SCC 591, this Court held that there is no rule of thumb that in each and every case, where a finding is recorded by Court or Tribunal that the order of termination of service was illegal that an employee is entitled to fu