!" #$%$!&'()(

*'+,*(--*--

!

"#

$$$$$

-*--(.,/

The present petition has been filed with a prayer that the

service which the petitioner had rendered, w.e.f. 04.12.1985 to 31.03.1994,

be taken as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits of the

petitioner.

The fact as mentioned in the petition is that the petitioner was

initially appointed as a fireman with the respondent-Municipal Committee,

Khanna, on 04.12.1985. Thereafter keeping in view the objection raised by

the Department of Local Bodies, services of the petitioner were terminated

on 07.07.1987, which action was challenged by the petitioner before the

APURVA

2022.04.02 17:24

I attest to the authenticity and

integrity of this document

High Court, Chandigarh

Labour Court. The Labour Court decided the claim of the petitioner vide

award dated 21.04.1992 and held the termination of petitioner's services to

be bad. The operative part of the said award dated 21.04.1992 passed by the

Labour Court is as under:-

<

-

x

-

x

-

Issue No.4 (Relief)

7.

Coming to the question of relief, since it

has been found that the termination of the services of

the workman was void-ab initio being in contravention

of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial

Disputes Act, he is entitled to reinstatement with full

back wages. However, the workman, in the course of

cross-examination, gave up his claim for back wages.

As such, the workman is reinstated without back wages.

He shall report for duty within 15 days of the

enforcement of this award. No order as to costs.=

A bare perusal of the above would show that the finding has

been given by the Labour Court that the termination of services of the

petitioner was void-ab initio, meaning thereby that the same cannot be taken

into consideration for any purposes, and the wordings used in the relief is

that the petitioner is to be reinstated, and the back wages were given up by

the petitioner himself, meaning thereby that keeping in view the order dated

21.04.1992 passed by the Labour Court, the petitioner is to be treated in

service for all intents and purposes starting from the date when he was

appointed in the year 1985.

That after the reinstatement, the petitioner worked continuously

and ultimately retired upon attaining the age of superannuation on

31.05.2016. The respondents, while computing the pensionary benefits of

APURVA

2022.04.02 17:24

I attest to the authenticity and

integrity of this document

High Court, Chandigarh

)

the petitioner only gave the benefits of the service which the petitioner

served after being reinstated on 31.03.1994 as a qualifying service and the

service which the petitioner had rendered prior to the said date has not been

taken into account as a qualifying service on the ground that there is no

continuity of service granted by the Labour Court while reinstating the

petitioner. This action of the respondents is under challenge in the present

petition with a prayer that the respondents be directed to grant the petitioner

the benefit of services from 04.12.1985 to 31.03.1994 as a qualifying

service and re-compute the pensionary benefits of the petitioner and release

the same along with the interest on the delayed payments.

After notice of motion, reply has been filed on behalf of the

respondents, wherein they have stated that though the petitioner was

reinstated in service on the basis of the award dated 21.04.1992, passed by

the Labour Court, but as the wordings 'continuity of service' has not been

mentioned in the