CWP-22939 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (244) 1. CWP-22939 Divisional Forest Officer (Territorial) Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar Smt. Rekha 2. CWP-23528 Divisional Forest Officer (Territorial) Forest Division, Mill Smt. Krishna and another 3. CWP-24024 Divisional Forest Officer (Territorial) Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar Smt. Parwati and another 4. CWP-24153 Divisional Forest Officer (Territorial) Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar Smt. Rama and another CORAM: Present: 22939-2018 and connected matters IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 22939-2018 Divisional Forest Officer (Territorial) Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar Versus and another 23528-2018 Divisional Forest Officer (Territorial) Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar Versus Smt. Krishna and another 24024-2018 Divisional Forest Officer (Territorial) Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar Versus Smt. Parwati and another 4153-2018 Divisional Forest Officer (Territorial) Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar Versus and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Mr. Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG, Haryana for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Sonak, Advocate for respondent No.1/workman, in all the cases. **** 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 09.09.2025 Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar …Petitioner ...Respondents Gate, Airport Road, Hisar …Petitioner ...Respondents Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar …Petitioner ...Respondents Forest Division, Mill Gate, Airport Road, Hisar …Petitioner ...Respondents KULDEEP TIWARI Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG, Haryana for respondent No.1/workman, in all the cases. MANPREET SINGH 2025.09.17 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-22939 KULDEEP TIWARI 1. captioned writ petition(s adjudication. 2. grievance from the award dated 16.03.2018 (Annexure P learned Industrial Tribunal Court, through the instant writ petition Constitution of India, the workme post with continuity in service, and full back wages from the date of of demand notice, i.e. 02.05.2016, and all other consequential benefits. 3. Court, that the respondent are now working with only issue, which remains pending considerat payment of full back wages. has arisen in a bunch of petitions, bearing CWP connected matters, decided on 05.09.2024 Court, where paragraph of the said judgment, is extracted hereinafter: 22939-2018 and connected matters KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) Since the common award has been challenged in a captioned writ petition(s), therefore, the same are being taken up together for adjudication. The Forest Department, which is the Management, fetching grievance from the award dated 16.03.2018 (Annexure P learned Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar, has approached this hrough the instant writ petition(s), cast under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, wherethrough, the reference was answered in favou en and they were granted the relief of re with continuity in service, and full back wages from the date of of demand notice, i.e. 02.05.2016, and all other consequential benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset apprises this that the respondent No.1/workmen, after passing of the award now working with the petitioner/Management only issue, which remains pending considerat payment of full back wages. He further apprises this Court has arisen in a bunch of petitions, bearing CWP connected matters, decided on 05.09.2024 rein, the back wages were reduced paragraph of the said judgment, is extracted hereinafter: “17. Considering the fact that workmen have already been re-engaged, they are working since their re engagement and they had not from retrenchment to reinstatement, this Court finds it appropriate to reduce the amount of back wages from 50% to 30%. The said amount shall be paid within three months from today and it would not carry interest.” 2 award has been challenged in all the above ), therefore, the same are being taken up together for The Forest Department, which is the Management, fetching grievance from the award dated 16.03.2018 (Annexure P-10), passed by the Labour Court, Hisar, has approached this , cast under Articles 226/227 of the the reference was answered in favour of granted the relief of re-instatement on the same with continuity in service, and full back wages from the date of issuance of demand notice, i.e. 02.05.2016, and all other consequential benefits. rned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset apprises this n, after passing of the award (supra), Management-Forest Department, and the only issue, which remains pending consideration is with regard to the apprises this Court that similar issue has arisen in a bunch of petitions, bearing CWP-22006-2017, and other connected matters, decided on 05.09.2024, by a Coordinate Bench of this in, the back wages were reduced from 50% to 30%. The relevant paragraph of the said judgment, is extracted hereinafter:- “17. Considering the fact that workmen have already engaged, they are working since their re engagement and they had not worked during the period from retrenchment to reinstatement, this Court finds it appropriate to reduce the amount of back wages from 50% to 30%. The said amount shall be paid within three months from today and it would not carry interest.” ll the above ), therefore, the same are being taken up together for The Forest Department, which is the Management, fetching ), passed by the Labour Court, Hisar, has approached this , cast under Articles 226/227 of the r of on the same issuance rned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset apprises this (supra), , and the ion is with regard to the that similar issue and other , by a Coordinate Bench of this . The relevant “17. Considering the fact that workmen have already engaged, they are working since their re- worked during the period from retrenchment to reinstatement, this Court finds it appropriate to reduce the amount of back wages from 50% to 30%. The said amount shall be paid within three MANPREET SINGH 2025.09.17 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-22939 4. dispute the judgment (supra), and submits that he has no objection, in case, all the above mentioned writ petitions are directions. Therefore, the that back wages are 5. 6. September 09 Manpreet 22939-2018 and connected matters Learned counsel for the respondent No.1/workme dispute the judgment (supra), and submits that he has no objection, in case, all the above mentioned writ petitions are directions. Therefore, the impugned award is modified, only back wages are reduced to 30%. Consequently, the instant writ petition Photocopy of this order be placed on all the connected case files. September 09, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 3 l for the respondent No.1/workmen, does not dispute the judgment (supra), and submits that he has no objection, in case, all the above mentioned writ petitions are disposed of, with similar impugned award is modified, only to the extent, Consequently, the instant writ petition(s) are disposed of. Photocopy of this order be placed on all the connected case files. (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No n, does not dispute the judgment (supra), and submits that he has no objection, in case, , with similar to the extent, Photocopy of this order be placed on all the connected case files. MANPREET SINGH 2025.09.17 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment