Gujarat High Court High Court

Omega vs Parmar on 7 May, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Omega vs Parmar on 7 May, 2010
Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/11944/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11944 of 2009
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

OMEGA
ELEVATORS - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

PARMAR
RAMESHKUMAR M - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
DIPAK R DAVE for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR DG SHUKLA for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 07/05/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

Learned
Advocate Mr. Dipak R. Dave for petitioner has submitted that in this
petition, award of reinstatement with 25 per cent back wages is
challenged by petitioner. After issuing notice by this court to
respondent, affidavit of unemployment is not filed by workman,
therefore, it is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Dave that let
affidavit of unemployment under section 17B of ID Act, 1947 is
required to be filed by respondent workman. Learned Advocate Mr.DG
Shukla for respondent workman has submitted that respondent will
file affidavit under section 17B of ID Act, 1947 within period of
one week from today.

In
light of this back ground, question raised and involved in this
petition would require detailed examination. Hence, Rule. Ad interim
relief in terms of para 6(B) on condition that petitioner shall have
to pay last drawn wages to respondent workman with effect from 6th
February, 2009 till 30th April, 2010 within one month
from date of receiving copy of affidavit of unemployment as required
under section 17B of ID Act, 1947 from respondent and, thereafter,
it is further directed to petitioner to pay regularly last drawn
wages to respondent workman till special civil application is
finally decided by this Court. However, it is made clear by this
court that in case if petitioner is having any material or cogent
evidence to establish before this Court that respondent is gainfully
employed in any establishment and is receiving adequate remuneration
while being employed in establishment, then, it is open for
petitioner to file appropriate application before this Court for
modification of this order. It is clarified that respondent workman
is entitled for last drawn wages under sec. 17B of ID Act, 1947 till
he reaches age of superannuation or final disposal of this petition,
whichever is earlier.

Learned
Advocate Mr. DG Shukla waives notice of rule on behalf of respondent
workman.

(H.K.

Rathod,J.)

Vyas

   

Top