Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/1058/2011 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1058 of 2011
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4026 of 2011
To
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1062 of 2011
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4031 of 2011
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 7820 of 2011
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1058 of 2011
To
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 7824 of 2011
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1062 of 2011
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
Sd/-
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
Sd/-
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
NO
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
NO
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
NO
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
NO
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
NO
=========================================
ARVIND
MILLS LIMITED
Versus
TARUNBHAI
MANILAL SHAH
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR DG
CHAUHAN for
the Appellant
MR YOGEN N PANDYA for the Respondent
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
Date
: 25/07/2011
COMMON
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
1. We have
heard learned counsel Mr. D.G. Chauhan for the appellant and Mr.
Yogen Pandya for the respondent.
2. In the
writ petitions filed by learned counsel Mr. Yogen Pandya, interim
order has been passed, directing the present appellant to deposit the
entire amount of compensation awarded by the Industrial Court under
the Bombay Industrial Relation Act, 1946.
3. Learned
counsel for the respondent has fairly stated that in his petitions,
the respondent workmen were not claiming that they may be given the
amount of compensation. What they were claiming before the learned
Single Judge in the writ petitions was that they are entitled to
reinstatement in service along with back wages and they are not
interested in compensation.
4. Learned
counsel Mr. D.G. Chauhan informed the Court that he has also filed
Special Civil Application Nos. 5162 of 2011, 5163 of 2011, 5165 of
2011, 5166 of 2011 and 5167 of 2011.
5. Therefore,
interest of justice demands that the writ petitions filed by the
learned counsel for the parties be heard and decided together. Since
the respondent workmen are not interested in compensation awarded by
the Industrial Court, it will be futile to direct the appellant to
deposit the amount of compensation as directed by the learned Single
Judge by interim order dated 27.6.2011.
6. In view
of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the present
Appeals are allowed. The interim order granted by the learned Single
Judge on 27.6.2011 is set aside. The matters are remanded back to the
learned Single Judge with a request to decide the Special Civil
Applications filed by the appellant and the respondents together on
merits subject to His Lordship’s convenience.
7. In view
of the order passed in the main Letters Patent Appeals, no orders are
required to be passed on the Civil Applications and the same stand
disposed of.
Sd/-
(V.M.
SAHAI, J.)
Sd/-
(G.B.
SHAH, J.)
omkar
Top