Gokalsing vs Nadiad

Considering the fact that Special Civil Application No.11409 of 2009 is filed by Nadiad Petroleum Services wherein original petitioner has challenged the award passed by learned Labour Court, Nadiad. Prayer made in Para-13(B) in petition is quoted as under:-

Allow this Special Civil Application by issuing a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the award passed in reference LCN No.196 of 1997 by Presiding Officer Labour Court Nadiad dated 14.12.2007 and be pleased to quash and set aside the order passed by the Ld. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Nadiad in Payment of Wages Application No. 33 of 2008 under recovery proceedings and other consequential proceedings.

In view of aforesaid prayer made in Para-13(B) wherein two orders were under challenge, one is award passed by learned Labour Court, Nadiad in reference LCN No.196 of 1997 dated 14.12.2007 wherein learned Labour Court has granted reinstatement with continuity of service and with full backwages for the interim period. The service of workman was orally terminated on 24.03.1997, so question of staying the backwages from 24.03.1997 to 14.12.2007. Thereafter, order which has been passed by learned Labour Court in Payment of Wages Application No.33 of 2008 (Exh-6) where learned Labour Court has passed an order on 17.01.2009 allowing Recovery Application and granting amount of Rs.3,05,007/- in favour of workman which is to be recovered by Revenue Authority as per order issued by learned Labour Court and in pursuance of that notice for attachment has been issued under Section 154 and 155 dated 25.09.2009 by Mamlatdar, Nadiad(city), Nadiad.

This Court has passed an order on 06.11.2009, which is quoted as under:-

1. Mr. Devnani, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is ready to reinstate the respondent workman without prejudice to rights and contention and is also ready to deposit the reasonable cost for the default in not pursuing the matter before the Labour Court well in time.

2. In view of the above, Notice returnable on 27th November, 2009 on condition that the petitioner deposits the amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) on or before 9th November, 2009.

3. By ad interim order, the execution and implementation of the award, so far as back-wages is concerned, shall remain stayed. However, reinstatement is not stayed and the petitioner shall reinstate the respondent workman as and when he reports for duty in any case before the next returnable date.

4. Office to issue the writ after the amount of Rs. 10,000/- is deposited.

5. Petitioner shall be at the liberty to communicate the order to the Mamlatdar. Direct service permitted.

This Court has made it very clear in Para-3 by granting ad-interim relief for execution and implementation of the award, so far as backwages is concerned, shall remain stayed and there is no stay against reinstatement. Meaning thereby that from 24.03.1997 till date of award 14.12.2007 relief of backwages has been stayed from the date of award i.e.14.12.2007 onwards. This stay is not operated against the right of respondent employees. Question of reinstatement now become disputed question of fact on the basis of submissions made by both the learned advocates. According to respondent, workman has not reported on duty and according to petitioner, respondent has not allowed to resume duty. This dispute cannot be examined by this Court.

Therefore, let learned advocate Mr.Devnani have instruction in respect to payment of regular wages to the workman from 14.12.2007 onwards till 30.04.2010. Therefore, matter is adjourned to 11.05.2010.

It is made clear by this Court that this Court has not granted any stay against order passed in Recovery Application dated 17.01.2009.

(H.K.RATHOD, J.) ..mitesh..

Top