Gujarat High Court
P vs Prototype on 28 September, 2010
Author: M.R. Shah
Bench: M.R. Shah
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/13538/2009 1/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13538 of 2009
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================================
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 ?
=========================================================
P
T C KAMDAR MANDAL - Petitioner(s)
Versus
PROTOTYPE
DEVELOPMENT & TRAINING CENTER - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
KISHOR M PAUL for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR MUKESH H RATHOD for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 28/09/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
RULE.
Mr.Mukesh Rathod, learned advocate waives the service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.
In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective parties, present petition is taken up for final hearing today.
By way of this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner P.T.C. Kamdar Mandal has prayed for appropriate writ, order and/or direction, quashing and setting aside the judgement and order dtd.31/12/2008 passed by the learned Additional District Jude, Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.5, Rajkot, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 73 of 1997 preferred under sec.17 of the Payment of Wages Act, by which, the appellate Court has allowed the said appeal preferred by the concerned respondent, by quashing and setting aside the order dtd.10/6/1996 passed by the authority in Payment of Wages Application No.4 of 1982 preferred under the Payment of Wages Act, and directed the concerned respondent to pay 15% special allowance to the concerned workman for the period between 1/3/1981 and 4/12/1981 and further imposed 10 times penalty, solely on the ground of limitation.
Having heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, it appears that entitlement of 15% special allowance to the workman is not in dispute, however, the appellate authority allowed the appeal and quashed and set aside the order passed by the authority under the Payment of Wages Act, solely on the ground that the application under the Payment of Wages Act was barred by limitation as per sec.15(2) of the Payment of Wages Act.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly considering the fact that entitlement is not disputed and considering the smallness of the amount, which hardly comes to Rs.2000=00 to Rs.3000=00, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the appellate authority by quashing and setting aside the order passed by the authority under the Payment of Wages Act be restored, by directing the concerned respondent to pay to the concerned workman 15% special allowance for the period between 1/3/1981 and 4/12/1981 as entitlement of the same is not under challenge.
At this stage, Mr.Mukesh Rathod, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent has requested to reduce the amount of penalty, as imposition of 10 times penalty by the first authority under the Payment of Wages Act is too excessive and on higher side.
Mr.Kishor Paul, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has requested this Court to impose reasonable penalty and has left it to the court.
In the facts and circumstances of the case if the penal;ty is reduced from 10 times to 5 times, the ends of justice would be met.
In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present petition succeeds. The impugned judgement and order dtd.31/12/2008 passed by the learned Additional District Jude, Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.5, Rajkot, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 73 of 1997 is hereby quashed and set aside and the order dtd.10/6/1996 passed by the authority in Payment of Wages Application No.4 of 1982 under the Payment of Wages Act, is hereby restored and the penalty of 10 times is reduced to 5 times only. Consequently, the amount due and payable shall be paid to the concerned workman at the earliest. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent only. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
[M.R. SHAH, J.] rafik Top