Yunus Aladbhai Kareja vs Shri Kataria Enterprise
2022 Latest Caselaw 295 Guj

     C/SCA/4846/2021                          ORDER DATED: 10/01/2022




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4846 of 2021

==========================================================
                        YUNUS ALADBHAI KAREJA
                                Versus
                       SHRI KATARIA ENTERPRISE
==========================================================
Appearance:
JEET Y RAJYAGURU(8039) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
                  Date : 10/01/2022
                   ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned advocate Mr. Varun K. Patel, waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent.

2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Jeet R. Rajyaguru appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned judgment and award dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot rejecting Recovery Application No.76 of 2019, is required to be set aside, since the Labour Court has not considered the wages, which were mentioned in written submission / argument dated 27.02.2020 before the Labour Court. He has submitted that as per the award dated 24.07.2019 passed by the Labour Court in Reference (LCR) Case No.51 of 2016, the petitioner is entitled to 30% back wages, however when he filed the recovery application under the provisions of Section 33C(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act (I.D. Act), the Labour Court without assessing the back wages, has rejected the application and hence, may be set aside

3. Per contra, learned advocate Mr.Patel, appearing for the respondent has submitted that in fact, the petitioner did not

C/SCA/4846/2021 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2022

produce any documentary evidence, showing his entitlement of the back wages. He has submitted that since no details were provided, the Labour Court has precisely rejected the application of the petitioner filed under the provisions of Section 33C(1) of the I.D. Act.

4. I have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties.

5. The fact which is not in dispute that by the award dated 24.07.2019 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot in Reference (LCR) Case No.51 of 2016, the respondents were ordered to reinstate the petitioner in service with 30% back wages. The said award has become final, since the respondent has reinstated the petitioner in service. However, since the petitioner was not paid the 30% back wages, he was constrained to file Recovery Application No.76 of 2019 before the Labour Court claiming 30% back wages. The Labour Court, Rajkot has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under the provisions of Section 33C(1) of the I.D. Act, for the reason that the petitioner did not produce any documentary evidence with regard to the entitlement of 30% back wages.

6. It is noticed by this Court that the petitioner in his written submission dated 27.02.2020 had given his details with regard to his wages and accordingly has calculated an amount of Rs.2,16,650/- which comes to 30% of back wages, as per the award passed by the Labour Court. The petitioner, however has not produced any documentary evidence with regard to his actual payment of wages, which can be taken into consideration before fixing his wages. It is also pertinent to

C/SCA/4846/2021 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2022

note that the respondent also did not provide any details to the Labour Court with regard to the entitlement of 30% back wages, as per the award passed by the Labour Court. Once the Labour Court had ordered reinstatement with 30% back wages, it was also equally incumbent upon the respondent to provide the details to the Labour Court, however the respondent has also failed to do so and the Labour Court has also not called upon the respondent to provide such details of the wages of the petitioner.

7. Under the circumstances, the impugned judgment and award dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot rejecting Recovery Application No.76 of 2019, is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Labour Court, Rajkot. The Labour Court is directed to pass appropriate orders, after examining the evidence produce by both the parties with regard to fixation of the back wages, as per the award dated 24.07.2019 passed in Reference (LCR) Case No.51 of 2016. The Labour Court, after examining the evidence which would be produced by either of the sides, shall pass appropriate orders.

8. In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) MAHESH BHATI/27