Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Employee Rights: Back Wages Granted in Termination Case: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal victory, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a judgment delivered by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH on 29th September 2023, ruled in favor of an employee, Mr. Rishi Ram, in a case concerning the termination of his services by the Punjab State Transport Department.

The judgment, rendered in RSA-1533-1992, examined the circumstances surrounding Mr. Rishi Ram's dismissal from his position. His services were terminated in 1984, and he subsequently filed a civil suit to challenge the termination and seek various consequential benefits, including back wages.

The court found that the department had terminated Mr. Rishi Ram's services without following the proper procedures, ultimately leading to the order of termination being set aside by the trial court in 1991. However, the trial court did not grant back wages for the period Mr. Rishi Ram remained absent from duty.

The pivotal issue in this case was whether Mr. Rishi Ram was entitled to back wages for the period of his absence from duty. The first appellate court had granted back wages, a decision that the State government appealed.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH, in his judgment, stated, "The only issue involved in the present appeal is as to whether the respondent was entitled to get back-wages for the period he remained absent from duty." The court cited the principle that in cases of wrongful or illegal termination of service, the wrongdoer is the employer, and there is no justification to relieve the employer of the burden to pay the employee his dues in the form of back wages.

The judgment emphasized that there was nothing on record to suggest that Mr. Rishi Ram was gainfully employed elsewhere during the period of his dismissal. As a result, the court upheld the decision of the first appellate court, granting back wages for the relevant period.

This judgment reinforces the importance of due process in employment terminations and highlights the responsibility of employers to adhere to proper procedures. It also underscores the significance of providing back wages to employees in cases of wrongful or illegal termination.

Mr. Rishi Ram's legal counsel, Ms. Navroop Jawanda and Mr. Puneet Jindal, expressed satisfaction with the judgment. They stated that the court's decision aligns with principles of justice and employee rights.

The State government, represented by Mr. Vinay Kumar Gupta, AAG, Punjab, had contested the case but did not succeed in overturning the lower court's ruling. The judgment, which is seen as a significant victory for employee rights, is expected to have a far-reaching impact on similar cases in the future.

Date of Decision: 29.09.2023

STATE OF PUNJAB vs SH. RISHI RAM

Latest Legal News