225 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision :22.04.2026 CHANDAN LAL (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRs.

.....Petitioner VERSUS PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT AND OTHERS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. F.S.Virk, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Kapil Bansal, DAG, Haryana.

KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral)

1. Through the instant petition, filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the legality of the impugned Award dated 29.09.2000 (Annexure P-6), has been put to challenge by the workman (since deceased), as the reference was answered against him, and the claim statement was dismissed.

2. During the pendency of the instant petition, the petitioner- workman, died, and now the instant petition, is being contested by his LRs, who are already on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is a clear violation of Sections 25-F and 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the fact in its right perspective, therefore, the impugned Award is required to be interfered with.

3. Elaborating his arguments, he submits that the workman, had earlier filed