Gujarat High Court
Rhine vs Mahesh on 11 July, 2011
Author: K.M.Thaker
Bench: K.M.Thaker
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/14406/2010 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14406 of
2010
=========================================================
RHINE
ENGINEERING PVT LTD & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
MAHESH
KANJIBHAI ROHIT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
KABIR A HATHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1,
MR KR
KOSHTI for Respondent(s) : 1,
MR PG MAVLANKAR for Respondent(s) :
1,
(MR JB PARDIWALA) for Respondent(s) : 2,
MR PF ADHVARYU for
Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 28/02/2011
ORAL ORDER
1. By order dated 29.10.2010 this Court (coram:Honourable Mr. Justice M.R. Shah) has passed order issuing Rule. Thereby, the petition has been admitted.
2. By the same order the Court also granted ad-interim relief in terms of para 18(D).
3. Heard Mr. Hathi, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Koshti, learned advocate for the respondent.
4. Mr. Koshti, learned advocate has submitted that after the above referred order dated 29.10.2010 was passed, the respondent workman took out Civil Application No.1235 of 2011 seeking relief of payment of last drawn wages in accordance with Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the "I.D.Act"). He has submitted that this Court (coram: Honourable Mr. Justice S.R. Brahmbhatt) has passed order dated 9.2.2011 by which the relief prayed for by the respondent workman (i.e. payment of last draw wages as per section 17B of the I.D. Act) has already been granted.
5. Having regard to the fact that the petition has been admitted by order dated 29.10.2010 (along with ad-interim order in terms of para 18(D) of petition) and thereafter the respondent workman took out application seeking compliance of Section 17B of the I.D. Act, which also has been granted by order dated 9.2.2011, it is but appropriate, in the facts of the case, to confirm the ad-interim relief granted by order dated 29.10.2010.
6. At this stage Mr. Koshti, learned advocate for the respondent has submitted that the respondent workman is ready and willing to finally settle the dispute and there is likelihood of settlement between the parties.
7. It would be open to the respondent workman to make offer for final settlement and submit to the competent officer of the petitioner company. If and when such offer is made the petitioner company would consider the same and convey its response to the respondent within 3 weeks from the receipt of such offer. If the matter gets settled between the parties it would be open to the respondent or to the petitioner to make request for disposal of the petition in terms of the settlement. In the meanwhile, and in the event settlement is not arrived at until the final hearing and disposal of the petition, the ad-interim relief granted by order dated 29.10.2010 will continue and will enure until final hearing and decision subject to the petitioner complying the requirements under Section 17B of the I.D. Act and paying last drawn wages as per Section 17B of the I.D. Act.
8. With the aforesaid condition and clarification the ad-interim relief granted by order dated 29.10.2010 is confirmed.
(K.M.THAKER,J.) Suresh* Top