Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/159/2011 5/ 5 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 159 of 2011
With
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16445 of 2010
=========================================================
ACIL
NAVSARJAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION & 2 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
N
P KANZARIYA & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
GM JOSHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3.
MR SHRISH M TRIVEDI for Respondent(s) :
1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 29/04/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard
learned advocate Mr.G.M.Joshi for petitioners and learned advocate
Mr.Shirish M. Trivedi for respondent No.1 – workman.
1.1 The
respondent – workman – Shri N.P. Kanzariya is also present
before this Court.
2. Rule
in SCA No.16445/2010,
Learned advocate Mr.Shirish M. Trivedi waives service of notice of
Rule on behalf of respondent No.1 – workman.
3. With
consent of both learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective
parties, the matters are taken up for hearing today.
4. In
SCA No.159/2011, the petitioners have challenged order passed by
Labour Court, Amreli in Recovery Application No.10/2008, Exh.13,
dated 30.12.2008 whereby Labour Court, Amreli has awarded in all
Rs.48,534/- to be paid by petitioners to respondent – workman
and for that amount, recovery certificate is to be issued in favour
of recovering Authority.
4.1 At
this stage, learned advocate Mr.Joshi for petitioners submitted that
aforesaid amount of Rs.48,534/- has already been paid by petitioners
to respondent workman. This fact is also admitted by respondent –
workman and his Advocate Mr.Trivedi before this Court and therefore,
order passed by Labour Court, Amreli in Recovery Application
No.10/20089 dated 30.12.2008 is fully satisfied.
5. In
SCA No.16445/2010, petitioners have challenged award passed by Labour
Court, Amreli in Reference No.61/2004, Exh.48, dated 25.10.2007
whereby Labour Court has set aside termination order, granted
reinstatement with continuity of service with 20% back wages of
interim period with cost of Rs.1500/-.
6. Learned
advocate Mr.Trivedi for respondent – workman submitted that
financial condition of the workman is very poor and the workman is
not able to maintain his family because he remained out of job since
15.7.2003 and subsequently also, workman is not reinstated by
petitioners from date of award – 25.10.2007. He also submitted
that in all, workman has rendered service for 22 years.
7. Learned
advocate Mr.Joshi for petitioners submitted that petitioner No.1
establishment is prepared to settle entire matter with respondent
workman by paying some lumpsum amount in respect to all claims of
respondent workman against petitioner No.1 – establishment.
8. Both
learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties as well
as respondent workman have left to the Court for determining the
appropriate amount of compensation in favour of respondent workman
which will be considered as full and final settlement between the
parties.
9. Learned
advocate Mr.Joshi submitted that considering the fact that if award
in question passed by labour Court, dated 25.10.2007 in Reference
No.61/2004 is to be fully satisfied in accordance with law by
petitioner No.1 – establishment and also considering service of
respondent workman continued till 30.4.2011, then total amount comes
to Rs.3,02,000/- which includes wages from date of award and also of
terminal benefits. However, he makes it clear before this Court that
earlier Rs.48,534/- towards 25% back wages has not been included by
petitioner No.1 – establishment.
10. Considering
the entire matter, length of service of workman, financial condition
of workman and keeping in mind family circumstances which has been
faced by respondent workman and monthly wages of Rs.4823/- which was
received by workman at the time of termination on 15.7.2003 being an
old salary, on that basis a calculation has been made by petitioner
No.1- establishment and therefore, according to my opinion, if amount
of Rs.3,25,000/- is fixed and paid to respondent workman by
petitioner No.1 – establishment towards full and final
settlement in respect of both SCAs, which will meet ends of justice
between parties. This amount has been fixed by this Court keeping in
mind that no claim whatsoever is remained or due of respondent
workman against petitioner No.1 establishment.
10. Learned
advocate Mr.Trivedi submitted that whatever calculation has been made
by petitioner No.1 – establishment and suggested the figure
considering old salary which was received by workman at the time when
his service was terminated on 15.7.2003. Subsequently, salary has
been revised and if that has to be considered, then amount comes to
Rs.4 lacs.
11. It
is made clear by this Court in SCA No.159/2011 wherein order of
recovery passed by Labour Court in Recovery Application No.10/2008,
Exh.13, dated 30.12.2008 is fully satisfied by petitioners and in
pursuance to aforesaid order, no claim remains to be paid by
petitioner No.1- establishment to respondent – workman.
Therefore, that has been fully satisfied by petitioner No.1 –
establishment.
12. Therefore,
the petitioner No.1 – establishment is directed to pay
Rs.3,25,000/- by account payee cheque in name of respondent –
workman – Shri N.P. Kanzariya, within a period of one month
from date of receiving copy of present order and respondent –
workman shall give receipt thereof.
13. It
is made clear that in case the amount is not paid by petitioner No.1
– establishment as per directions issued by this Court, then it
is open for respondent workman to file appropriate contempt
proceedings against petitioner No.1 – establishment.
14. Accordingly,
the award passed by Labour Court, Amreli in Reference No.61/2004,
Exh.48, dated 25.10.2007 is modified to the aforesaid extent. Rule is
made absolute to aforesaid extent in SCA No.16445/2010.
15. In
view of above, SCA No.159/2011 is disposed of accordingly.
[
H.K.RATHOD, J. ]
(vipul)
Top