Maharaja Salt Works Co Pvt Ltd vs Adambhai Sidikbhai
2023 Latest Caselaw 123 Guj

     C/SCA/7294/2018                                    ORDER DATED: 05/01/2023




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7294 of 2018

==========================================================
                       MAHARAJA SALT WORKS CO PVT LTD
                                   Versus
                        ADAMBHAI SIDIKBHAI & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MUKESH A PATEL(636) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
SUNILSINH J CHAUHAN(8334) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
UNSERVED REFUSED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE

                               Date : 05/01/2023
                                    ORAL ORDER

1. On 05.05.2018, this Court passed the following order:-

"Heard learned advocate Mr. Mukesh Patel appearing for the petitioner.

Considering the reasons which are assigned by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rajkot, it appears that in view of the financial crunch faced by the petitioner, the submission of learned advocate for the petitioner in so far as it relates to costs of Rs.10,000/- deserves little consideration. Hence, Notice returnable on 12.06.2018.

In the meantime, by way of ad-interim relief, the award dated 14.11.2017 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rajkot is stayed in so far as costs of Rs.10,000/- is concerned with a specific condition that the outstanding salary which has been determined by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rajkot, i. e.

C/SCA/7294/2018 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2023

Rs.8000/- shall be deposited within a period of one week from today before the Registry of this Court, failing which the interim protection which has been granted by way of present order will automatically stand vacated. It is however, made clear that as and when the said amount is deposited, it would be open for the respondent --workman to apply for withdrawal of the said amount and after proper identification and necessary procedure, the office is directed to permit the said withdrawal through A/c. Payee Cheque in the name of the respondent - workman. The aforesaid arrangement is subject to the result of the petition.

Direct Service is permitted."

2. It is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Mukesh Patel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that accordingly, the salary amount of Rs.8000/- has been deposited in this Court. With respect to the costs, it is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Patel that the learned Labour Court was not justified in awarding the amount of costs which was more than the amount to be recovered by way of salary. He submits that the costs should not have been imposed at the first place. He therefore submits that the costs may be quashed and set aside.

3. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Krunal Pandya appearing on behalf of the respondent workman submits that the respondent workman is a poor person doing the salt work and therefore, since he has to undergo the litigation for recovery of dues, the learned Labour Court has appropriately awarded the costs. He therefore submits that the costs should not be quashed, which is just and proper.

C/SCA/7294/2018 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2023

4. Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

5. It is not disputed that the respondent was a salt worker and belongs to very poor strata. Looking to the quantum of the amount involved in the present case, this Court is of the opinion that no interference is called for in the amount which has been awarded towards the outstanding salary. The said amount of salary has been deposited in this Court and the same is also permitted to be withdrawn by the respondent workman. To the said extent, the impugned judgment and order is confirmed.

6. Learned advocate Mr. Krunal Pandya submits that the respondent workman is very poor and cannot afford the expenses to travel to this Court for withdrawal of the salary amount. He therefore prays that the said amount be transferred to the learned Labour Court No.3, Rajkot so that the respondent workman can approach the learned Labour Court and withdraw the said amount. The said submission is not opposed by learned advocate Mr. Mukesh Patel. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to remit the amount deposited in this Court to the learned Labour Court No.3, Rajkot. It is made clear that it will be open for the respondent workman to apply for withdrawal of the amount and after due identification and verification, the learned Labour Court is directed to permit the said withdrawal through account payee cheque or RTGS in the name of the respondent workman.

7. With respect to the imposition of costs, learned advocate Mr. Mukesh Patel submits that the workman had prayed for Rs.3000/- only towards the costs in his application, however the learned Labour Court has exceeded its jurisdiction and awarded the amount which is more than what was prayed for. Learned advocate Mr. Krunal Pandya for the respondent workman could not dispute

C/SCA/7294/2018 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2023

the said fact.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the fact that the respondent workman is a poor person, he is entitled to costs. The amount of cost is quantified at Rs.3000/-. The respondent workman shall be entitled to the costs of Rs.3000/-. The impugned judgment and order is modified to the said extent.

The present Special Civil Application is partly allowed and the same is disposed of accordingly.

(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)

cmk