HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CM(M) No. 272/2024 CM No. 7300/2024 1. Chief Engineer KPDCL 2. Revenue Officer, PDD Unit- IInd, Bijbehara. …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: None. vs 1. Shaddi Lal Sharma S/O Late Shri Dina Nath Sharma R/O H. No. 260/C, Sector-I, Durga Nagar, Jammu, 180013 2. J&K Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court Srinagar/ Jammu 3. Treasury Officer, Additional Treasury, Tankipura Srinagar. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. P. N. Raina, Sr. advocate with Mr. J. A. Hamal, Advocate. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER 04.04.2025 ORAL 1. Through The medium of present petition, the petitioners have challenged order dated 26.11.2024 read with order dated 03.12.2024 passed by the J&K Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court Srinagar/Jammu, whereby in an execution petition filed by respondent No. 1, salary account head No. 2801 (Power) of the petitioners has been attached and the same has been directed to be defreezed subject to deposit of fifty percent of the decretal amount in the Tribunal. Serial No. 116 2 CM(M) No. 272/2024 CM No. 7300/2024 2. It appears that an award came to be passed by the respondent-Tribunal on 25.04.2003, whereby termination order of respondent No. 1 was set aside and he was directed to be treated in-service. Respondent No. 1 was further held entitled to fifty percent of back-wages. The award, it seems, was challenged by the petitioners by way of writ petition bearing OWP No. 1118/2003 before this Court. The said writ petition was dismissed by this Court in terms of order dated 11.04.2005. The petitioners assailed the judgment of writ court by way of LPA bearing LPAOW No. 10/2007, but without any success, as the said LPA came to be dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court in terms of order dated 10.05.2012. Thus, the award passed by the Tribunal attained finality. 3. It seems that when the petitioners did not comply with the terms of the award, respondent No. 1 was constrained to file execution petition before the learned Tribunal. During the execution proceedings, the impugned orders came to be passed by the learned Tribunal directing attachment of salary account head of the petitioners. 4. The petitioners have challenged the impugned orders primarily on the basis that they have already deposited an amount of Rs. 15,62,032/-, which stands released in favour of the respondent No. 1 and in this regard they have also filed objections to the execution petition but the learned Tribunal without considering this aspect of the matter, has relied upon the calculations made by respondent No. 1 and issued the impugned orders. 3 CM(M) No. 272/2024 CM No. 7300/2024 5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1, upon instructions, has submitted that respondent No. 1 has no objection if the impugned orders passed by the learned Tribunal are set aside and the matter relating to the execution of the award is considered by the Tribunal afresh after taking into account the objections filed by the petitioners before the said Tribunal. 6. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned orders passed by the learned Tribunal are set aside with a direction that the learned Tribunal shall consider the execution petition filed by respondent No. 1 afresh after taking into account the objections stated to have been filed by the petitioners before the said Tribunal and after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 7. Disposed of along with the connected application. 8. A copy of this order be sent to the learned Tribunal for information. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE Jammu 04.04.2025 Sahil Padha Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No. Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No. Sahil Padha 2025.04.07 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document