Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/993/2011 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 993 of 2011
=================================================
APOLLO
TYRES LTD - Petitioner(s)
Versus
JITENDRA
SHANTILAL BHAVSAR - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance :
MR.VARUN
K.PATEL for Petitioner(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
1,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 22/02/2011
ORAL ORDER
Heard
Mr. Patel, learned advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Patel has
submitted that in connection with the similar incident, which is the
subject matter of present petition, other two employees, who were
found to be involved in the same incident, similar action of
termination was taken against them and in case of one of the said
three employees, the Labour Court passed a similar order, which was
challenged by the company by way of Special Civil Application
No.21519 of 2007. He has relied on the order passed by the Court in
the said matter and submitted that since the incident involved in
both the cases is same; the employer is also the same; the penalty is
the same; and similar award is under challenge in present petition
also, similar order, as is passed in case of Special Civil
Application No.21519 of 2007 may be passed.
In
the said case, this Court (Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.K.Rathod) on
4.10.2007 has passed the following order :-
Heard
learned Advocate Mr. KC Raval for the petitioner and Mr. HS Mulia,
learned Advocate for the respondent.
Through
this petition, the petitioner has challenged the award made by the
labour court, Baroda in Reference No. 912 of 2000 dated 18th
June, 2007 wherein the labour court has granted reinstatement with
continuity of service with 20% back wages for interim period.
On
22nd August, 2007, this Court has, while issuing notice
to the respondent returnable on 24th September, 2007,
granted ad interim relief in terms of Para 13-ii subject to
compliance of section 17B of the ID Act, 1947.
Rule.
Heard the learned Advocates for parties on interim relief.
Today,
learned Advocate Mr. HS Mulia for the respondent has placed on
record affidavit of respondent regarding unemployment. Copy thereof
has been served on learned Advocate Mr. KC Raval by the learned
Advocate Mr. Mulia.
Considering
the averments of unemployment made in para 3 by the respondent,
learned Advocate Mr. Raval submitted that the petitioner will pay
to the respondent last drawn wages.
In
view of the aforesaid back ground, no counter is filed against the
affidavit of unemployment by the petitioner and considering the
fact, the respondent is entitled for full wages last drawn by him
with effect from 18th June, 2007 till 30th
September, 2007 within the period of one month from the date of
receipt of copy of this order and thereafter it is directed to the
petitioner to regularly pay such full wages last drawn by the
respondent regularly every month till the matter is finally decided
by this Court. However, it is open for the petitioner to move this
court by filing an application for modification of this order if the
petitioner is having any material to satisfy this court that the
respondent has been gainfully employed in any establishment and has
been earning and receiving adequate remuneration from the
establishment.
In
view of the aforesaid observations and directions, ad interim relief
granted by this court on 22nd August, 2007 is hereby
confirmed as interim relief till the matter is finally decided by
this Court.
Having
regard to the said submission, RULE. Ad-interim relief in terms of
para 5(b) subject to compliance with the requirement under Section
17(B) of the Act. Notice as to interim relief returnable on
22.3.2011.
[K.M.Thaker,
J.]
kdc
Top