( 1 ) HEARD the learned Advocate, Mr. M. K. Patel, appearing on behalf of applicant ? original respondent and learned Advocate, Mr. Chari, appearing on behalf of respondent ? original petitioner.

( 2 ) THE respondent ? original petitioner ? Blindmen s Association has challenged the award dated 19. 5. 2000 passed by Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference No. 728 of 1988 by filing SCA No. 1610 of 2001. The Labour Court, Ahmedabad has come to conclusion that by threat, resignation was obtained from the workman and, therefore, workman is entitled the reinstatement with continuity of service with full back wages of interim period. The Labour Court, Ahmedabad has directed the original petitioner to implement and enforce the award under Section 17a of the I. D. Act,1947 within a period of 30 days from the date of publication. This award can be enforced considering the provisions of Section 17a of the I. D. Act,1947 after completion of 30 days from the date of publication. The SCA No. 1610 of 2001 is filed by original petitioner on 20. 2. 2001 and this Court has passed the order issuing Rule and granted ad-interim relief in terms of Para. 4 (B), whereby, the entire award including reinstatement with back wages has been stayed by this Court. This ex-parte ad-interim relief is continued as it is.

( 3 ) THE applicant ? original respondent has filed present Civil Application on 29. 5. 2006. In Para. 4 and 5, the applicant has made following averments :

( 4 ) THE applicant respectfully submits that as per the provisions of Section 17b of Industrial Disputes Act,1947, if the employer approaches this Hon ble Court against the award of Labour Court and the Hon ble Court stays the reinstatement awarded by the Labour Court and if the employee / workman is not gainfully employed elsewhere then, in that case, the concerned employee is entitled to get last drawn wages which the employee was getting at the time of termination. In the present case, this Hon ble Court has stayed the impugned award of the Labour Court, subject to compliance with the provisions of Section 17b of the ID Act. The applicant therefore prays this Hon ble Court to grant the benefits of Sec. 17b of Industrial Disputes Act to the applicant in the interest of justice.

( 5 ) IT is respectfully submitted that the applicant is a handicapped person. The applicant has disability to the extent of 60% on the right hand. The applicant is facing great financial hardships and is unable to maintain his family. Despite the award of the Labour Court, Ahmedabad, the applicant has not been reinstated in service till today, nor he has been paid the wages as directed by the Labour Court. The applicant has not been able to get job elsewhere despite serious efforts. Therefore in view of all these facts and circumstances, the applicant prays this Hon ble Court to allow this petition and grant last drawn wages as per Sec. 17b of I. D. Act in favour of the applicant in the interest of justice. ?

( 6 ) IT is important to note that what kind of contention has the petitioner raised before this Court knowing fully well that notice of rule is not received by respondent workman. The Rule which has been issued by this Court on 5. 3. 2001 is still remained unserved to the respondent workman. The endorsement made by civil department that notice to respondent is unserved as not found, then, it is a duty of the Advocate who is appearing on behalf of petitioner to take necessary steps as required under Code of Civil Procedure to serve the respondent workman. Looking to the original record, it appears that the Advocate has not taken any steps or made any efforts to serve the respondent. Meaning thereby that order passed by this Court in the year 2001 remained unserved for more than 5 years to the respondent workman. Therefore, in light of this original record, it is necessary to reproduce Para. 3, 4, 5 and 5 of the reply as under :

( 7 ) WITH reference to para -2, I respectfully submit that the Special Civil Appli

Click Here to Read the rest of this document