SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Guj) 732

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SONIA GOKANI, J.
Dhanaji Krishnaji - Appellant
Versus
Manjushree Textile Limited - Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 15759 of 2019
Decided On : 14-10-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : J.K. Parmar
For the Respondent: J.K. Parmar

Headnote:

Labour Law – Employment and Service matter – Order of reinstatement – Back wages – Award – Dismissal from the service – Liquidation and Payment Commissioner was directed to pay the backwages to the petitioner – Judgment and order passed in Recovery Application No. passed by Labour Court No. 1 and also to seek direction to release amount as per the award passed by Industrial Tribunal in Appeal – petitioner is an employee of Manjushree Textile Limited who had joined services as a regular employee – Petitioners service came to be dismissed which had been challenged by way of T-Application same was partly allowed order of reinstatement was passed – Applicant that he joined the services on and was dismissed from service – He challenged rder of dismissal by filing an application before the Labour Court – Labour Court held that the order of dismissal passed against the applicant-worker was bad and illegal – Instead of ordering reinstatement, the Labour Court directed the old owner of the company to pay back-wages from the date of discharge – Held, In view that applicant had while moving this application, has no regard for truth and the HC-NIC applicant has moved this court with some ulterior motive. Even, while hearing the appeal filed by the O.L., after ascertaining the applicant workman, we have requested Mr. Vasavada to represent the case of the applicant workman and applicant workman had also agreed that his case will be represented by Mr. Vasavada and we have also heard Mr. Vasavada at length while disposing of O.J. Appeal and we had also given time to Mr. Vasavada as requested by applicant to consider for acceptance of any amount suggested by the Court, to be paid to him by way of ex-gratia payment. We are of the view that the attitude adopted by the applicant workman clearly suggests that he is abusing process of law and no case is made out, even for delay in filing review application. Hence, there is no substance in the review application filed by the applicant Court rejected the same on the ground that the total amount received by the employee is Rs. 1,00,000/- and he had not come with clean hands – Application dismissed. (Paras 5, 6 and7)

ORDER :

SONIA GOKANI, J.

1. By filing this application, challenge is made to the judgment and order passed in Recovery Application No. 926 of 2005 dated 20.10.2018 passed by the Labour Court No. 1, Ahmedabad and also to seek direction to release the amount as per the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal in Appeal no. 54 of 1994.

2. The petitioner is an employee of Manjushree Textile Limited who had joined the services on 04.02.1964 as a regular employee. On 17.01.1984, the petitioner's service came to be dismissed which had been challenged by way of T-Application No. 120 of 1984. The same was partly allowed and the order of reinstatement was passed.

3. The labour Court's judgment was challenged by way of appeal being Appeal No. 54 of 1994. The Manjushree Textile Limited was going into liquidation and the Payment Commissioner was directed to pay the backwages to the petitioner. The settlement had been arrived at between the Government of India and Union of Mazdoor Mahajan Sangh. The petitioner was also entitled to get the backwages as per the judgment and order of the Industrial Court.

4. He had filed the Company Application being No. 210 of 2000 in Company Petition No. 205 of 1996 which since has been allowed by this Court on 15.11.2000, whereby the order of the learned Single Judge had been set aside. The same is reproduced as under:-

"This company application is filed by applicant Dhanaji Krishnaji, a permanent worker of Manjushree Textiles Mills Co. Ltd. (In Liquidation) with a prayer to direct the Official Liquidator as well as the Payment Commissioner, the respondents no. 1 and 3 to pay the legal dues as per order passed by the Industrial Court, Ahmedabad in Appeal No. 54/1994 dated 12.6.1997.

It is the case of the applicant that he joined the services on 4.2.1964 and was dismissed from service on 17.1.1984. He challenged the order of dismissal by filing an application being T. Application No. 120/1984 before the Labour Court, Ahmedabad. It appears that during the pendency of the proceedings, the Mill company was ordered to be wound up and Official Liquidator was appointed by this court. It further appears that thereafter, the Gujarat State Textiles Corporation has taken over the said company from the original owner during the pendency of the proceedings before the Labour Court. The Gujarat State Textiles Corporation was also made a party in the said application filed by the applicant. The Labour Court, by its judgment dated 30.5.1988 held that the order of dismissal passed against the applicant-worker was bad and illegal. However, instead of ordering reinstatement, the Labour Court directed the old owner of the company to pay back-wages from the date of discharge.

It appears that the applicant challenged the said order of the Labour Court by filing a petition being Special Civil Application No. 5498/89 before this Court. However, this Court, on 1.9.93 directed the applicant to file and agitate his claim before the appropriate forum. The applicant filed an appeal being Appeal No.(I.C.) 54/1994 before the Industrial Court, Ahmedabad. The Industrial Court, Ahmedabad by judgment and order dated 17.6.1997 allowed the appeal by confirming the order passed by the Labour Court declaring the order of dismissal as illegal and bad in law. However, the Industrial Court directed that as far as the back-wages are concerned, it would be the liability of the old management and the Payment Commissioner is liable to make the payment. According to the Industrial Court, the applicant is entitled to all the benefits as if he was on duty on the appointed day and whatever the benefits the other workers have enjoyed, the applicant is also entitled to have the similar benefits. Accordingly, the Industrial Court has directed the respondent no. 2-The Gujarat State Textiles Corporation either to reinstate the applicant or to pay the benefits available to him.

This Court, by its order dated 29.8.2000 directed the respondent no. 4-I.A. Vora or his successo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top