Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/95/2001 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 95 of 2001
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2749 of 1989
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 11862 of 2000
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 95 of 2001
=========================================================
GSRTC
- Appellant(s)
Versus
SHASHIKANT
V BHATT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
HARDIK C RAWAL for
Appellant(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
Date
: 10/01/2011
ORAL ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)
None present for the
respondent though served and though the appeal was called out twice
during the course of the day. The appellant Corporation has called
into question oral judgment dated 8.7.1999 of learned Single Judge
of this Court in Special Civil Application No.2749 of 1989; whereby
the award and order of the Labour Court ordering reinstatement with
full backwages in favour of the respondent was modified. The
respondent had approached the Labour Court with an industrial
dispute in which his dismissal from service was under challenge.
Even as the Labour Court had, after appreciation of the evidence,
recorded the findings to the effect that the charges of embezzlement
or misappropriation were not proved, the learned Single Judge has
found such finding to be perverse, in the sense that the respondent
was held to be negligent in discharge of his duties. Loss caused to
the appellant did not seem to be in dispute. Thus, the impugned
award was modified by the learned Single Judge by directing that the
appellant shall pay only 75% of the backwages. As recorded in the
impugned judgment itself, the appellant had reinstated the
respondent in service and filed the petition and pursuant to exparte
ad-interim stay of execution of the award 50% of the backwages was
withheld.
It was argued by learned
counsel Mr.Raval that in view of the serious acts of misconduct
indulged in by the respondent, the award of backwages was required
to be confined to 50%, which was already paid and further direction
of learned Single Judge to pay interest needed to be modified in the
interest of justice.
Having heard learned
counsel and having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of
the case, particularly the finding regarding fault of the
respondent, his rich record of previous defaults and failure of the
Labour Court to exercise its discretion in a judicious manner, the
appeal is partly allowed so as to modify the impugned judgment to
the extent that the respondent shall be entitled to only 50% of the
backwages and arrears of backwages, if any is still payable, shall
not be paid with any interest. Remaining directions contained in the
impugned judgment are not disturbed. The appeal is disposed
accordingly with no order as to costs.
Civil Application
No.11862 of 2000 stands disposed, if it is still pending.
(D.
H. WAGHELA, J.)
(K. A. PUJ, J.)
kks
Top