S.C.AGRAWAL, J. (1) HAVING regard to the affidavit of Dharam Pal regarding service of notice on Respondent 4, the service of notice on Respondent 4 is treated as sufficient. Service of notice on Respondent 6 is dispensed with. (2) SPECIAL leave granted. (3) THIS appeal relates to the employment of Respondents 2 to 5 (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) as Auxiliary Nurses and Midwives in R.B. Sewak Ram Maternity Hospital, Jalandhar (hereinafter referred to as the appellant Hospital). The respondents are holders of diploma for having passed the Auxiliary Nurses Midwives Examination held by the Jammu & Kashmir State Medical Faculty. They are, however, not registered under the Punjab Nurses Registration Act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). They were employed as Nurses in the appellant Hospital. Having regard to the provisions contained in Section 17 of the Act, which prohibits appointment/employment of an unregistered nurse, the services of the respondents were terminated by the appellants. The said termination of services of these respondents gave rise to an industrial dispute which was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court, Jalandhar. By award dated 4-4-1995, the Labour Court held the said termination of services of the respondents to be illegal on the ground that it constitutes retrenchment under Section 2(00) of the Industrial Disputes Act and that the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 were not complied with. The Labour Court directed reinstatement of the respondents with continuity of service and full back wages. The writ petition filed by the appellants against the said award of the Labour Court has been dismissed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana by the impugned judgment dated 26-7-1995. Hence this appeal. (4) SHRI O.C. Mathur, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants has urged that the Labour Court was in error in directing reinstatement and payment of full back wages to the respondents in the facts and circumstances of this case. The submission of the learned counsel is that since the respondents were not duly registered as Nurses under the provisions of the Act, they could not be appointed as Nurses and, therefore, the direction regarding their reinstatement would run counter to the express provisions of the Act. We find considerable merit in the said submission of the learned counsel. The submission of the learned counsel is that since the respondents were not duly registered as Nurses under the provisions of the Act, they could not be appointed as Nurses and, therefore, the direction regarding their reinstatement would run counter to the express provisions of the Act. We find considerable merit in the said submission of the learned counsel. In view of the prohibition contained in Section 17 of the Act against employment of a person who is not registered as a Nurse under the Act, no direction could be given for reinstatement of the respondents till they obtain such registration. The direction regarding reinstatement given by the Labour Court has, therefore, to be read as subject to the respondents obtaining the necessary registration under the provisions of the Act. We are also of the view that in these circumstances back wages could not be awarded to the respondents and the Labour Court was in error in directing payment of back wages. (5) FOR the reasons aforementioned the direction given by the Labour Court regarding payment of back wages is set aside and as regards reinstatement of the respondents in service, it is directed that the said direction about reinstatement would be subject to the respondents obtaining registration as Nurses under the provisions of the Act. (6) THE appeal is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.