SCA/21337/2007 3/ 3 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 21337 of 2007 ========================================================= ROTO MOULD (INDIA) PVT. LTD. - Petitioner(s) Versus SHAMBHUBHAI BHIKHABHAI PADHIYAR - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR NILESH A PANDYA for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR YOGENN PANDYA for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 29/07/2008 ORAL ORDER
By
order dated 10th January, 2008 the petition is admitted
and ad-interim relief in terms of Para 14-B is granted. The petition
has come up for confirmation of interim relief. This Court has taken
into consideration the submissions made by Mr. Nilesh Pandya for
petitioner and Mr.Yogenn Pandya for respondent. Mr. Nilesh Pandya
submitted that so far as the direction requiring the petitioner to
reinstate the respondent is concerned, the petitioner company has no
objection and in fact the petitioner company has repeatedly requested
the respondent to resume duty. Mr. Nilesh Pandya further submitted
that actually in response to the request by the petitioner-company,
the respondent had reported for duty one day and next day he stopped
reporting for duty on his own volition. Mr. Nilesh Pandya further
submitted that even thereafter the petitioner -company has requested
the respondent to report for work and even recently the respondent
has been asked to report for duty on 1st August, 2008. It
appears from the submissions of Mr. Nilesh Pandya and Mr. Yogenn
Pandya that the respondent is insisting that he would work only on a
particular type of machine and not on the machine he is instructed to
work. Before the alleged termination, the respondent was working as
an operator in the petitioner company. Therefore, it is needless to
state that the respondent is supposed to perform duties as an
operator on any machine wherever the possibility of reinstating him
exists. It also appears that the respondent has some apprehensions
about the new machines which have been installed. In that regard,
Mr. Nilesh Pandya submitted that the petitioner company is ready to
give him necessary training also for a period of one week. In that
view of the matter, the ad-interim relief granted earlier shall
continue till final hearing of the petition or until further orders
if and when passed. This interim relief is granted on the condition
that the petitioner shall reinstate the respondent and he will be
assigned necessary duties on 1st August, 2008. Mr. Yogenn
Pandya has assured that the respondent shall report for duty on and
from 1.8.2008 and shall not refuse to work as an operator as per the
directions of his superior. If necessary, the petitioner may give
necessary training to the respondent for operating the machine.
Subject to the said observations and clarification, the ad-interim
relief granted earlier is confirmed. The petition to be listed for
hearing in due course.
[
K.M. Thaker, J. ]
rmr.