The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of an employee to claim wages for the period between dismissal and reinstatement, as per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and the principles established in relevant case law.

ORDER :

1. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in which the petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.5.2018 passed by the Labour Court, Junagadh in Recovery Application (C-2) No. 17 of 2015.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Krishnan M. Ghavariya for Mr. Murli Devnani for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. U.T. Mishra for the respondent.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the respondent workman has been working as Clerk with the petitioner nagarpalika from 5.8.1998 and he was discharging his duty as a regular employee. It is the case of the respondent that he was paid according to the minimum wages. However, it is the case of the petitioner that the respondent was employed purely on ad-hoc basis. It is further submitted that the services of the respondent were terminated on 30.6.1999. The respondent, therefore, raised industrial dispute and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court, Junagadh which was registered as Reference Case (LCJ) No. 18 of 2000. It is further submitted that the concerned Labour Court partly allowed the said reference vide award dated 11.3.2003, whereby the petitioner herein was directed to reinstate the respondent in service without continuity in service and without back wages. Learned advocate submits that the petitioner challenged the said award passed by the Labour Court by filing petition being Special Civil Application No. 13247 of 2004. At this stage, it is pointed out that this Court, vide order dated 11.10.2004, admitted the petition and granted ad-interim relief in favour of the petitioner whereby the award passed by the concerned Labour Court was stayed. It is further submitted that thereafter this Court dismissed the said petition vide order dated 29.11.2012. Learned advocate, therefore, urged that when this Court has granted stay of the award during the period between October, 2004 to November, 2012, the respondent-workman is not entitled to claim any wages for the said period.

3.1 At this stage, learned advocate further submitted that the respondent was thereafter reinstated on 3.9.2014. However, as per the case of the respondent, when the petitioner has not paid wages during the period 1.2.2005 to 3.9.2014, the respondent filed recovery application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Court. The concerned Labour Court, by the impugned order dated 15.5.2018, partly allowed the said application and thereby directed the present petitioner to pay Rs. 2,86,947.60 ps. to the respondent. The petitioner has, therefore, preferred the present petition.

3.2 Learned advocate has assailed the impugned order mainly contending that the petitioner is not liable to make payment of wages during the period between 1.2.2005 to 3.9.2014 as this Court had granted stay in favour of the petitioner in the petition filed by the petitioner challenging the award passed by the Labour Court. Learned advocate would thereafter contend that in one proceeding filed by the respondent before the concerned Labour Court, the respondent had stated that he was getting Rs. 1989/- by way of monthly salary from the petitioner and in another proceeding, the respondent has stated that he was getting Rs. 2296/- when his services were terminated on 18.10.2003. It is submitted that the concerned Labour Court has calculated the amount on the basis of the salary of Rs. 2296/- and therefore on this ground, the impugned order passed by the Labour Court be quashed and set-aside.

4. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr. Mishra has opposed this petition. Learned advocate for the respondent has submitted that the concerned Labour Court has passed the award on 11.3.2003 and thereby directed the present respondent to reinstate the present petitioner without continuity of services and without back wages within a period of 30 days from the publication of the award. Learned advocate submitted that the petitioner challenged the said award by filing petit