SCA/5731/2008 3/ 3 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5731 of 2008 To SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5735 of 2008 ========================================================= SHREE DIGVIJAY CEMENT CO. LIMITED - Petitioner(s) Versus DHARMENDRASINGH KANAKSINGH - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : NANAVATI ASSOCIATES for Petitioner(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, MR RAJESH P MANKAD for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD Date : 03/07/2008 ORAL ORDER
Heard
learned advocate Mr. Joshi appearing for Nanavati Associates on
behalf of the petitioner, learned advocate Mr. RP Mankad on behalf
of the respondent.
The
affidavit in reply is filed by the respondent and separate affidavit
under Section 17B is also filed by the respondent, which has been
received by the petitioner, against which no counter affidavit is
filed by the petitioner.
I
have considered the submissions made by both the learned advocates
and I have also perused the award in question.
Considering
the submissions made by both the learned advocates, the question
involved in this petition requires detailed examination.
Hence,
Rule. Ad-interim relief granted in terms of para 7(B) on condition
to comply Section 17B of the I.D. Act 1947.
I
have considered the affidavit of unemployment filed by the
respondent workman and the Labour Court has granted reinstatement
with 10% back wages of interim period. That the workman is
unemployed and not a gainful employed, such affidavit is filed by
him and this Court is staying reinstatement award passed by the
Labour Court and against the affidavit of the unemployment, no
counter is filed by the petitioner, therefore, the workman is
entitled the last drawn wages, as required under Section 17B of the
I.D. Act 1947. Therefore, it is directed to petitioner to pay last
drawn full wages to the respondent workman with effect from 26th
September, 2007 to 31st July 2008 within a period of one
month from the date of receiving the copy of the said order. It is
further directed to petitioner to pay last drawn full wages to the
respondent workman regularly till the matter is finally decided by
this Court.
Hence,
Notice as to interim relief returnable on 8.8.2008.
Learned advocate Mr. Mankad waives service of notice of rule on
behalf of the respondent.
However,
it is made clear by this Court that if the petitioner is having any
material or concrete evidence of gainful employment of the
respondent workman in any establishment and receiving adequate
remuneration from the establishment, then it is open for the
petitioner to file such application before this Court for
modification of this order. The petitioner is also having right to
file rejoinder against the reply filed by the respondent.
(H.K.RATHOD,J.)
Suresh*