PETITIONER: MUKUND ENGINEERING WORKS. Vs. RESPONDENT: BANSI PURSHOTTAM DATE OF JUDGMENT11/10/1993 BENCH: PUNCHHI, M.M. BENCH: PUNCHHI, M.M. JEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J) CITATION: 1994 SCC Supl. (2) 725 ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
+ Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 2981-82 of 1993
726
2.Heard learned counsel for the parties. In view of the
finding recorded by the labour court as also by the High
Court, the misconduct of the respondent workman stood
proved. In this situation of gravity it becomes
ununderstandable as to why the respondent should get
reinstatement and that too with back wages. In the totality
of circumstances, we feel that the respondent should be
bound to opt for either of the two i.e. he should either get
reinstatement with no back wages or just back wages without
reinstatement. However, Mr Mehta appearing for the
appellant has offered that should the respondent be held
entitled to back wages only, the Management is prepared to
pay a further sum of Rs 20,000 to close the issue. We find
this offer to be more apt and reasonable. Therefore, we
alter the orders of the High Court as also that of the
labour court in denying to the respondent reinstatement but
holding him entitled to the back wages till date plus
another sum of Rs Twenty thousand as offered by Mr Mehta.
The appeals are allowed accordingly with the aforesaid
terms. The respondent be paid the sum he is entitled to
within six weeks, subject to adjustments, if any. No costs.
728