Hindustan Zinc Limited vs Raman Lal on 24 March, 1987

0
29
Rajasthan High Court
Hindustan Zinc Limited vs Raman Lal on 24 March, 1987
Equivalent citations: 1987 WLN UC 264
Author: J S Verma
Bench: J S Verma

JUDGMENT

Jagdish Sharan Verma, C.J.

1. This is a revision, arising out of an order of temporary injunction granted in a suit by the respondent Raman Lal challenging his reversion to the post of Canteen Supervisor from the post of Canteen Manager.

2. According to the respondent, this reversion results in alteration of his status from that of an officer to a subordinate, which illegal. On this basis, the respondent claimed a temporary injunction restraining the petitioner-employer, from implementing the order of reversion. Such a temporary injunction has been granted in the respondent’s favour and the appellate order dated 5-5-1982 also imposes two conditions to be observed by the respondent, namely

(1)that the respondent will produce the entire evidence in the suit within six months of the framing of the issues; and

(2)in the absence of the Canteen supervisor the respondent will also discharge the duties of the Canteen Supervisor.

3. At the very outset, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, made an offer that the respondent would be paid the emoluments of the Canteen Manager. To protect his pecuniary interest during the pendency of the suit, even in case the petitioner is permitted to implement the impugned order reverting the respondent to the post of Canteen Supervisor from the post of Canteen Manager. It is also pointed out that a part of the plaintiff’s evidence has already been recorded in the suit. In these circumstances, I consider it appropriate to direct as mentioned here after.

4. The petitioner-employer shall continue to pay to the respondent-employee, the emoluments of the post of Canteen Manager during the pen outcome of the suit. It is, howerer, clarified that the continuance of the respondent as Canteen Manager, therefore, would depend on the decision in the suit. The respondent-employee is directed to complete the entire evidence summer vacation this year.

5. The trial court shall then proceed to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible. The temporary injunction granted by the court below, shall stand modified to this extent.

6. The revision is partly allowed in this manner. No costs.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here