AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
1 paragraphs · 169 wordsJustice Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The petitioner is aggrieved since he is not granted the entire benefits flowing out of Annexure P-1 award. As per the said award passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Shimla, the petitioner was granted the benefit of reinstatement in service with continuity and seniority, during the period he was kept out. What was denied is only the back wages. Therefore, the period, the petitioner kept out is liable to be counted as service for all purpose except actual back wages. In other words, the service shall be counted for the purpose of conferment of work charge status /regularization, if it is not counted. There will be a direction to the respondents to take appropriate action in the light of this judgment and disburse the eligible benefits to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner before the second respondent. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.
