NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1020/2023 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1020 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3585 of 2009
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1020 of 2023
==========================================================
SHREE K K SHAH SABARKANTHA AROGYA MANDAL
Versus
MUKUNDBHAI B PATEL
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR UT MISHRA(3605) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 04/08/2023
COMMON ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. By means of this intra-court appeal, the appellant seeks to challenge the directions contained in the judgment and order dated 09.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.3585 of 2009, to deposit the entire amount of wages within four weeks in the account of the respondent - workman.
2. The order dated 09.09.2022 is sought to be challenged by means of this appeal presented before this Court in the month of January, 2023. It is Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:10:37 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1020/2023 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2023 undefined evident that the appellant has not complied with the order passed by this Court and proceeded to file appeal at a belated stage. It is sought to be submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no clarity in the judgment of the learned Single Judge as to what amount of wages for which period was required to be paid to the respondent workman. More so, when the award of reinstatement was set aside and the matter was relegated for fresh adjudication before the Labour Court, there was no occasion for the learned Single Judge to issue direction to pay wages to the workman. Both these submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants are found to be misconceived for the simple reason that the directions contained in the order of the learned Single Judge in paragraph-19 are referable to an interim order of this Court in the writ petition directing for compliance of Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. On an application filed by the workman seeking a direction for payment of 17B wages, the respondent employer - appellant herein had offered and filed an affidavit Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:10:37 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1020/2023 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2023 undefined that the appellant was ready and willing to reinstate the petitioner - workman without prejudice to rights and contentions in the main matter challenging the award. On the said submission, the order dated 08.09.2009 was passed by this Court granting liberty to the employer to reinstate the workman on any other post than that of Ward Boy.
3. The observation in paragraph - 12 of the order of the learned Single Judge indicates that there was serious dispute with regard to compliance of interim order dated 08.09.2009. There were rival submissions before the learned Single Judge that neither the employer - appellant had reinstated the workman nor had paid wages under Section 17B. This finding returned by the learned Single Judge in paragraph-12 is sought to be assailed by placing a document dated 09.10.2009 before us which is appended at page-82 of the paper-book. It is sought to be submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant based on the said document that the fault lies on the part of the workman as he had refused to accept the offer given by the employer for reinstatement in compliance of Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:10:37 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1020/2023 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2023 undefined order dated 08.09.2009. On said submission, a pointed query was raised to the learned counsel for the appellant to demonstrate as to whether the document appended at page-82 of the paper-book was brought before the learned Single Judge by means of any affidavit filed on behalf of the employer. There is absolute denial about this fact. It is, thus, evident that the employer could not demonstrate before the learned Single Judge that offer of employment was given to the workman in compliance of the interim order dated 08.09.2009.
4. In the said scenario, we do not find any error in the decision of the learned Single Judge in directing to deposit entire amount of wages under Section 17B in compliance of the interim order passed by this Court, while setting aside the award of reinstatement passed by the Labour Court and relegating the matter back.
5. As this is a case of utter non-compliance of the order of this Court and the appellant has approached this Court after a period of unexplained delay, we Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:10:37 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/1020/2023 ORDER DATED: 04/08/2023 undefined are of the view that interest at the rate of 6% per annum is to be awarded to the respondent workman on the total amount of wages payable under Section - 17B from the date of the order of this Court in the writ petition till the date of actual payment.
6. Subject to the above observations and directions, the appeal stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected Civil Application also stands disposed of.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) (N.V.ANJARIA, J) GAURAV J THAKER Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:10:37 IST 2023