M/S VINAY AUTO PVT LTD vs NABH PARKASH & ANR — CWP/163/2018

Case under No Acts Defined. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 10-Jan-2018

CNR: PHHC010868812018

Filing Number

CWP/163/2018

Filing Date

08-Jan-2018

Registration No

CWP/163/2018

Registration Date

08-Jan-2018

Judge

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Coram

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Bench Type

Single

Category

18.5 - LABOUR ( 452 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

No Acts Defined

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S VINAY AUTO PVT LTD

    Adv. SACHIN MITTAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.NABH PARKASH & ANR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Kuldeep TiwariView PDF

    The Punjab and Haryana High Court modified an Industrial Tribunal's award granting reinstatement and back wages to Nabh Parkash. Finding the workman's termination violated Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act (lack of proper notice/procedure), the court upheld the illegality but replaced reinstatement with lump-sum compensation of Rs. 3.00 lakhs (Rs. 1.00 lakh per completed year of 3+ years service), citing the workman's attainment of superannuation age and Supreme Court precedents distinguishing daily wage workers from permanent employees. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Oct-2018

    Mr. Justice Rajiv Narain Raina

  4. 07-Sep-2018

    Mr. Justice Dr. Shekher Dhawan

  5. 07-Sep-2018

    —

    Mr. Justice Karamjit Singh

  6. 19-Apr-2018

    —

    Registrar-Judicial

  7. 10-Jan-2018

    Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

  8. 10-Jan-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 08-Jan-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/163/2018

casestatus.in Summary

The Punjab and Haryana High Court modified an Industrial Tribunal's award granting reinstatement and back wages to Nabh Parkash. Finding the workman's termination violated Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act (lack of proper notice/procedure), the court upheld the illegality but replaced reinstatement with lump-sum compensation of Rs. 3.00 lakhs (Rs. 1.00 lakh per completed year of 3+ years service), citing the workman's attainment of superannuation age and Supreme Court precedents distinguishing daily wage workers from permanent employees. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case