Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/9558/2013 on 30 December 2014
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 9558 of 2013-F Date of decision: 30.12.2013
The State of Himachal Pradesh & another …Petitioners
Versus Sh. Sewa Ram ...Respondents
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr.R.M. Bist, Deputy Advocate General with Mr.J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents.
For the Respondents: None.
Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral).
Having heard Mr. R.M. Bist, learned Deputy Advocate General, we are of the considered view that no ground for interference is made out in the impugned award dated 25.2.2013 passed by Presiding Judge Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Dharamshala in Reference No. 198 of 2012, titled Sh. Sewa Ram Vs. the Executive Engineer. The Tribunal, after appreciating the material placed on record by the parties, concluded that the respondents had failed to adhere the principle of ‘last come first go’, thus violate the statutory provision of Section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is difficult to accept that petitioner had abandoned the job and no work was available in the area at the relevant point of time. There is no evidence in that regard. The Tribunal has Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? High Court of H.P. 2013:HHC:12208-DB ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2026 00:10:21 :::CIS
2 specifically held that persons who were junior to the petitioner were continued to be engaged, whereas petitioner was not engaged, nor did the respondents issue any notice on the plea of abandonment. We notice that the Tribunal has held the petitioner entitled to benefit of only seniority and continuation in service. Back wages have not been allowed to the petitioner, as such, we find no infirmity in the impugned award and the petition is dismissed.
(Sanjay Karol)
Judge.
(V.K. Sharma),
Judge. 30th December, 2013 (KRS)
High Court of H.P. 2013:HHC:12208-DB ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2026 00:10:21 :::CIS