Gujarat High Court
Parmar vs State on 13 December, 2011
Author: K.M.Thaker
Bench: K.M.Thaker
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/11741/2011 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR ORDERS No. 11741 of 2011
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7953 of
2011
=================================================
PARMAR
KAMUBEN MANUBHAI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SENIOR MEDICAL OFFICER - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance :
MR
MAHENDRA U VORA for Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR DEVANG DAVE AGP for
Respondent(s) : 1,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 13/12/2011
ORAL ORDER
Today, learned advocate for the applicant has filed sick-note, however, I have considered the application on merits. Since the Court is not inclined to pass order against the applicant, the application is taken-up for hearing and decision today.
Rule.
Mr. Devang Dave, learned AGP, waives service of notice of rule for the opponent - State Government.
2. The applicant has taken-out present application seeking below mentioned relief:-
"6.(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to grant benefit of section 17B of Industrial Disputes Act during the pendency of main Special Civil Application No.7953 of 2011 from order passed by the Honourable Labour Tribunal dated 21.01.2011 in the interest of justice."
3. On perusal of the record, it is noticed that present opponent is the original writ petitioner who has preferred Special Civil Application No.7953 of 2011 challenging the award dated 21.1.2011 passed by the Labour Court, Palanpur in Reference (LCP) No.61 of 2003.
3.1 The Labour Court, Palanpur by the said award dated 21.1.2011 directed the original petitioner i.e. present opponent to reinstate the present applicant on her original post with 30% backwages. The opponent herein i.e. original petitioner felt aggrieved with the said order and direction and that therefore preferred the above mentioned writ petition being Special Civil Application No.7953 of 2011. The Court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi R. Tripathi) heard learned advocates for the petitioner and the respondent i.e. present applicant and opponent. After hearing the parties, the Court was pleased to issue Rule and admit the petition vide order dated 8.11.2011. By the same order dated 8.11.2011, the Court also granted interim relief in terms of para 10-c.
3.2 In view of the said order dated 8.11.2011, the operation of the award passed by the Labour Court, Palanpur has been stayed. Therefore, the applicant has taken out present application. The applicant has asserted that he is not gainfully employed elsewhere and he does not have any means to maintain his family. On such premise, she has requested that appropriate order directing the opponent to comply with the requirements under Section 17B of the Act may be passed.
4. The Court is conscious of the fact that today is the first returnable date and therefore, the opponent has not filed any affidavit controverting the assertions made by the applicant. Therefore, having regard to the fact that the applicant may not be deprived of the benefit of payment of last drawn wages under Section 17B of the Act for long time and opponent also may not be deprived of its right to place on record complete facts, present order is passed with a view to balancing interest of both the sides. It is considered appropriate to dispose of present application, at this stage, with below mentioned directions:-
4.1 Since the applicant has now filed the application declaring that she is not gainfully employed in any establishment, the applicant is now entitled to claim and receive benefits of payment of last drawn wages under Section 17B of the Act and that therefore, the opponent shall start making payment of last drawn wages to the applicant with immediate effect. If, however, at any stage, it comes to the notice to the opponent i.e. original writ petitioner that the applicant is gainfully engaged anywhere and/or that the applicant has crossed the age of superannuation and therefore, stands superannuated and/or there are any other reason which would deprive her from claiming and receiving the benefit under Section 17B of the Act, then, it would be open to the opponent herein to file appropriate affidavit and take out necessary application seeking modification or vacation of present direction.
With the aforesaid clarifications, observations and directions, present application stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
[K.M.Thaker, J.] kdc Top