IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 201 CWP-687-1999 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.07.2025 RIGHT GUARD WORKERS UNION AND ANOTHER ......Petitioners VERSUS PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL PUNJAB AND OTHERS .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** Present :- Ms. Priyanka Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurav Verma, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The writ petition had been instituted in the year 1999 seeking enforcement of the settlement dated 28.01.1997 and for ensuring that the petitioners are reinstated on the re-opening of the respondent company/industry. The writ petition was admitted on 30.11.2000. Counsel appearing for respondents No.4 and 5 was elevated to a bench of this Court. Notice was issued to respondents No. 4 to 7 vide order dated 20.09.2016. As per office order dated 18.11.2016, the respondents No.4 to 6 remained unserved as “No name of this company is here”. Ever since, the respondents No. 4 to 6 remain unserved as correct address has not been VISHAL SHARMA 2025.07.16 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-687-1999 (O&M) -2- furnished. Despite a large number of opportunities granted, the address of the contesting respondents could not be furnished. Counsel for the petitioners has even though made a strenuous effort to seek one more opportunity to find out the address and to effect service on the contesting respondents, however, she has also been confronted with the fact that the petitioners- Union is claiming re- employment under the settlement arrived at between the trade union and the industry and that the writ pertains to the year 1999, hence, no real and tangible benefit may actually be extended to the petitioners herein and the issue may at best be academic at this belated stage and the petitioners may not be actually interested in pursuing the writ petition. Thus, while dismissing the present writ petition on the ground that the petition may have become stale over time and that the rights of the petitioner may not be served and that the issue may only be academic. Liberty is however, nonetheless granted to the petitioner to move an appropriate application for seeking restoration of the instant writ petition and for its adjudication on merits in case any real and tangible right still survives and upon finding the address of the contesting respondents. Let such an application be moved within a period of four months, if so advised. All the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, are also disposed of. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JULY 09, 2025 JUDGE Vishal Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No VISHAL SHARMA 2025.07.16 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document