CWP-13332-2022 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 102 CM-7977-CWP-2025 in/& CWP-13332-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision :25.07.2025 Geeta ...Petitioner Versus The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Rohtak and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: Mr. Robin Lohan, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. None for the respondents. * * * Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) CM-7977-CWP-2025 Present application has been filed for recalling the order dated 24.04.2025 passed by this Court by which, the main writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, application is allowed. Order dated 24.04.2025 passed by this Court is recalled and the main writ petition is ordered to be restored to its original number and status and is taken up for hearing today itself. CWP-13332-2022 1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned award dated 11.08.2021 (Annexure P/4) passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial AARTI SHARMA 2025.07.25 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-13332-2022 (O&M) -2- Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Rohtak (for short, Labour Court’) by which, the claim of the petitioner that her services were wrongly terminated by the respondent-management, has not been accepted and the claim regarding reinstatement, continuity in service along with full back wages of the petitioner has been rejected by the Labour Court while passing the aforementioned Award. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner was working with the respondents as Helper from 01.03.2003 and rather than allowing the petitioner to discharge her duty, the petitioner was turned out during the Covid-19 period and therefore, the same amounts to termination of her services and the Labour Court has failed to appreciation the said fact and, therefore, the impugned award dated 11.08.2021 (Annexure P/4) is liable to be set aside. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record with his able assistance. 4. The petitioner though, filed the claim of reinstatement, continuity in service along with full back wages but never led any material evidence to prove her claim that her services were terminated wrongly to be true. 5. As per the impugned award dated 11.08.2021 (Annexure P/4), even the petitioner herself did not step into the witness box to lead evidence so as to prove her claim as raised by her in the claim petition. 6. In the absence of any fact proved by leading the material evidence on record, no relief could have been granted to the petitioner. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner concedes the fact that as of now there was no evidence brought on record by the petitioner before the AARTI SHARMA 2025.07.25 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-13332-2022 (O&M) -3- Labour Court to prove her claim that her services were wrongly terminated. 8. That being so, no grievance can be raised by the petitioner as the petitioner herself has failed to prove the facts by bringing on record the relevant evidence. 9. In order to interfere with the award of the Labour Court, perversity has to be proved either on the basis of facts or evidence brought on record. 10. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the present case, no ground for interference is made out and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. July 25, 2025 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) aarti JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No AARTI SHARMA 2025.07.25 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document