CWP-20977-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 107 CWP-20977-2025 Date of Decision :25.07.2025 Somi ...Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: Mr. Dhruv Sihag, Advocate for the petitioner. * * * Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) 1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned award dated 02.02.2024 (Annexure P/7) passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar (for short ‘Labour Court’) by which, the claim of the petitioner that her services has been terminated in violation of provisions of Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1947 Act’) has been rejected by the Labour Court. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the services of the petitioner has been wrongly terminated by the respondents and the Labour Court has failed to appreciate the said fact and, therefore, the impugned award dated 02.02.2024 (Annexure P/7) rejecting the claim of the petitioner 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 petition before Labour AARTI SHARMA 2025.07.25 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-20977-2025 -2- Court but in the said proceedings the petitioner never led any evidence to prove her claim to be true. As per the impugned award, even the petitioner herself did not step into the witness box to prove her claim inspite of repeated opportunities as raised by her in the claim petition. 5. In the absence of any fact proved before the Labour Court leading cogent evidence on record, no relief could have been granted to the petitioner. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner concedes the fact that as of now evidence was ever brought on record by the petitioner before the Labour Court to prove her claim. 7. In order to interfere with the award, perversity has to be proved either on the basis of facts or evidence brought on record. 8. 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