Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/256/2005 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 256 of 2005
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11235 of 2004
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
=================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=================================================
VERAVAL
FISHERIES CO OP BANK LTD. - Appellant(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
BANK WORKERS UNION - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance :
MR
PS GOGIA for Appellant(s) : 1,
MS PARUL P VASAVADA for
Respondent(s) : 1,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 04/10/2011
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
By
way of filing this appeal the appellant – original petitioner
has challenged the order dated 20th
October 2004 passed by the learned Single Judge
in Special Civil Application No.11235 of 2004 vide which he dismissed
the writ petition filed by the appellant – original petitioner.
2. The
short facts of the appeal are that the respondent-workman was working
as a peon with the appellant-bank. He was dismissed from service
with effect from 13th
May 1980 as he is alleged to have committed misconduct of cheating
the members and customers of the appellant-bank. The
respondent-workman raised the industrial dispute challenging the
action of the appellant-bank and the same was registered as BIR
Application No.70 of 1980 before the Labour Court, Junagadh.
3. The
Labour Court, after hearing both the parties came to the conclusion
that the action of the appellant-bank in dismissing the services of
the respondent-workman was legal and valid and thereby rejected the
application made by the respondent-workman.
4. The
respondent-workman, therefore, filed appeal before the Industrial
Court, Rajkot being Appeal (IC) No.9 of 1986. The Industrial Court,
after hearing the parties, confirmed the order of the Labour Court by
holding that the dismissal of the respondent-workman was legal and
valid, but directed the appellant-bank to pay the subsistence
allowance from the date of dismissal till the date of order of the
Labour Court i.e. from 13th
May 1980 to 9th
July 1986.
5. Feeling
aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Industrial Court, the
appellant-bank challenged the same before the learned Single Judge on
various grounds. The learned Single Judge by the impugned order
dated 20th October
2004 rejected the writ petition filed by the appellant-bank. Hence,
the present appeal.
6. Heard
learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. The
learned counsel for the appellant submitted that pending the
application before the Labour Court after the dismissal order the
workman is not entitled for the back-wages and in support of his
contention he relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case
of D.C. Roy v. Presiding Officer of the Labour
Court & Anr.,
reported in AIR 1976 SC 1760.
7. We
are of the view that the Industrial Court as well as the learned
Single Judge have erred in awarding subsistence allowance to the
respondent-workman from the date of dismissal till the date of order
of the Labour Court i.e. from 13th
May 1980 to 9th
July 1986. Therefore, the order passed by the Industrial Court in
awarding subsistence allowance to the respondent-workman from the
date of dismissal till the date of order of the Labour Court i.e.
from 13th
May 1980 to 9th
July 1986 and confirmed by the learned Single Judge is set aside.
The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
(V.M.
Sahai, J.)
(K.S.Jhaveri,
J.)
*mohd
Top