CWP-12866-2011 and other connected case :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 243(two cases) CWP-12866-2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 03.03.2025 M/S PICCADILLY AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED ...... Petitioner VERSUS MALKHAN SINGH AND ANR ...... Respondents CWP-3962-2012 (O&M) M/S PICCADILLY AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED ...... Petitioner VERSUS KULDIP SINGH AND ANR ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI *** Present :- Mr. Abhishek Kaushik, Advocate for Mr. Vipul Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Jasmeet Singh Bedi, Advocate for respondent No.1. *** Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) 1. In the present petitions, the grievance is being raised by the petitioner against the award dated 12.01.2011 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Labour Court by which, the respondents-workmen have been directed to be reinstated in service with continuity alongwith 50% of backwages. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the similar issue RIMPAL RANI 2025.03.06 17.22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12866-2011 and other connected case :2: raised between the petitioner and the other similarly situated workmen of the petitioner-company wherein the same benefit was granted by the Labour Court, has already been decided by the Co-orodinate Bench of this Court while passing order in CWP-4996 of 2014 titled as 'Piccadilly Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Panipat and another' and other connected petitions decided on 23.05.2024 hence, the present petitions also need to be disposed of in the same terms. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents-workmen submits that though the issue raised in the present petitions has been decided by the Coordinate Bench but the submission of the workmen is that the said judgment should not be relied upon as, the said judgment is already pending consideration in appeal before the LPA No.2398 of 2024 and connected cases on certain issues raised by the workmen against the said order. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. 5. Once, the issue raised in the present petitions has already been decided by the Co-ordinate Bench in CWP-4996-2014, , merely that the workmen are not satisfied with the said judgment and have filed an appeal, is no ground to not apply the said judgment in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 6. Further, learned counsel for the respondent-workmen concedes the fact that there is no stay of the said judgment, which is being relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner. RIMPAL RANI 2025.03.06 17.22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12866-2011 and other connected case :3: 7. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances as the issue raised in the present petitions has already been decided by the Coordinate Bench while passing order in case Piccadilly Agro Industries Ltd. (supra) and connected petitions, and said judgment has not been stayed by the Division Bench in the appeal, the present petitions are also disposed of in terms of the judgment in case Piccadilly Agro Industries Ltd. (supra). 8. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. 9. A photocopy of this order be placed on the connected case file. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE 03.03.2025 Rimpal Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable : No RIMPAL RANI 2025.03.06 17.22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12866-2011 and other connected case :4: being aggrieved on the ground that the said issue had already been decided in a different manner by Full Bench of this Court. Keeping in view the findings recorded by the coordinate Bench in paragraph 32, RIMPAL RANI 2025.03.06 17.22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document