Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2011 DAILYLAW 2382 (PNJ)

SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER ( CIVIL ) BALLABGARH, DISTT FTH. v. NARESH KUMAR AND ORS

CWP/8093/2011 · 2026-04-07

Kuldeep Tiwari

Public Interest Litigationbody2011

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 108 (I) CWP-8093-2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : April 07, 2026 SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL), BALLABGARH, DISTRICT FARIDABAD -PETITIONER V/S NARESH KUMAR AND ORS. -RESPONDENTS (II) CWP-8272-2011 SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL), BALLABGARH, DISTRICT FARIDABAD -PETITIONER V/S KISHORI LAL AND ORS. -RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Kapil Bansal, D.A.G., Haryana for the petitioner (in both writ petitions). Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the respondent No.1 (in both writ petitions). *** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1. This Court had passed the following order on 08.01.2026:- “It is informed by the learned State counsel that during the pendency of the instant petition, the respondents-workmen have been reinstated and, therefore, only the issue of back wages is alive for adjudication by this Court. He wants to have apt instructions from the quarter concerned as to whether the department still wants adjudication on the issue of reinstatement. The learned counsel for the respondents-workmen, on the other hand, submits that if the petitioner-department does not press for the adjudication of the reinstatement, they are ready to forgo their claim for back wages. DEVINDER YADAV 2026.04.08 09:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-8093-2011 AND CWP-8272-2011 2 Adjourned to 27.03.2026 to have apt instructions from the quarter concerned. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of another connected matter.” 2. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner, upon instructions, has informed the Court that the petitioner does not wish to pursue these writ petitions, inasmuch as the respondent No.1/workmen have already been reinstated. 3. With regard to the issue of back wages, as awarded by the Labour Court, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1/workmen, upon instructions, submits that the workmen do not intend to pursue execution of the impugned awards insofar as they pertain to the grant of back wages. 4. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the impugned awards are hereby modified to the extent that they shall operate solely with respect to the relief of reinstatement of the workmen, and shall not extend to the grant of back wages. 5. Both these writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. 6. Pending application(s) also stand disposed of accordingly. 7. A photocopy of this order be placed on file of connected case. (KULDEEP TIWARI) April 07, 2026 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2026.04.08 09:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment