Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Nagar Palika Ringus &Anr; vs Kailash Chand Pujari &Anr; on 27 November, 2017
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
D.B. Writ Restoration Application No. 776 / 2017
1. Nagar Palika Ringus Through Its Executive Officer, District
Sikar.
2. Director, Department of Local Self Government, Government of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Kailash Chand Pujari Son of Shri Vasudev Pujari, Aged About 52
Years, Resident of Bisau, District Jhunjhunu.
2. Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Anil Tiwari For Respondent(s) :
_____________________________________________________ HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH CHANDRA SOMANI Order 27/11/2017
1. The writ appeal was dismissed on account of defects notified by the registry not being removed. It is prayed in the application that counsel would ensure that the defects notified by the registry are rectified.
2. On 21/11/2017 writ restoration application was adjourned for today recording counsel's undertaking. We find that the defects notified by the registry in the appeal till date have not been rectified.
3. We are not inclined to restore the appeal not only for the reason defects have not been removed but also for the reason (2 of 2) [WRES-776/2017] the impugned order dated 20/02/2017 granting relief to the respondent is premised on Ann.5 & Ann.6, both of which are documents of the appellant to show that as of the year 1982 as also the year 1983 there was a vacant post of Naka Guard. The learned Single Judge has noted that services of the respondent being held to be terminated in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the respondent was reinstated in service on 17/10/1987 and the second stage dispute concerns fixation of his wages. The appellant placed respondent in the applicable pay scale w.e.f. 01/04/1990. As per respondent, he was entitled to be placed in the appropriate pay scale w.e.f.
02/12/1983 on account of the fact that Ann.5 & Ann.6 require that if there was a vacant post of Naka Guard, a person appointed as as Naka Guard should be paid salary in the applicable scale. In the appeal there is no ground mentioned as to why Ann.5 & Ann.6 would not entitle the respondent to the relief granted.
4. Application seeking restoration of the writ appeal is dismissed.
(DINESH CHANDRA SOMANI)J. (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)C.J. Anil Goyal-PS/65