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

2026 Supreme(Guj) 154

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHARGAV D. KARIA, L. S. PIRZADA, JJ.
Deputy Executive Engineer – Appellant 
Versus 
Kantibhai Bhulabhai Chauhan S/O Chauhan Bhulabhai Dhulabhai & Anr. – Respondent
R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 133 Of 2026 In Civil Application (For Directions ) No. 1 Of 2023 In R/Special Civil Application 7830bn of 2017, R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 134 Of 2026, R/Special Civil Application No. 7769 Of 2017, R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 135 Of 2026, R/Special Civil Application No. 7825 Of 2017, R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 136 Of 2026, R/Special Civil Application No. 7774 Of 2017, R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 137 Of 2026, R/Special Civil Application No. 7773 Of 2017, 
Decided On : 13-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr Mb Gohil
For the Respondent: Shrunjal Shah, Agp, Mr Mukesh H Rathod

Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act mandates that employees awaiting reinstatement during appeal must receive last wages, reflecting the legislative intent to support vulnerable employees.

Headnote:(A) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 17B - Appeals involving payment of wages during litigation - Benefit under section 17B must be granted to employees seeking relief from termination who have not found employment - Common order by Single Judge to pay wages from date of application upheld - Judicial notice taken that an employer holds more power than an employee. (Paras 4, 9, 10)

(B) The Court elaborated on the purpose of Section 17B, noting its role in ensuring employees can sustain during prolonged legal disputes. (Paras 4, 8)

Facts of the case:
The respondents were terminated in 2003, awarded reinstatement in 2016 with back wages, and sought Section 17B wages during appeals pending against this decision.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the granting of Section 17B wages from the date of application, justifying this based on the legislative intent behind the provision to protect employees.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the employer should be obligated to pay wages under section 17B while appeals are pending.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that under section 17B, an employee entitled to reinstatement must be paid wages, upholding the principle that employees are typically at a disadvantage during prolonged legal proceedings.

Result: Appeals disposed of; the appellant must comply with wage payment as directed.

Table of Content
1. pleadings for wages under id act (Para 2 , 3)
2. purpose of section 17b highlighted (Para 4)
3. employment status of terminated workers (Para 5)
4. appellant's argument on employment relation (Para 6)
5. court's observations on application delay (Para 7)
6. mandatory application of section 17b affirmed (Para 8 , 10)
7. conclusion on granting benefits (Para 12 , 13)

ORDER :

BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. M.B.Gohil for the appellant, learned advocate Mr. Mukesh Rathod for respondent No.1 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shrunjal Shah for respondent No.2.

2. These appeals are filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,1865 being aggrieved by the common order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Applications filed by the respondents with a prayer to grant wages under section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (For short ‘the ID Act’) on the ground that the respondents were not gainfully employed in any establishment and they are unemployed during the pendency of the Special Civil Applications filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the common Judgement and Award passed by the Labour Court granting relief of reinstatement along with continuity of service and 50% backwages for the interregnum period i.e. from the date of termination till date of the reinstatement.

3. Learned Single Judge, by common order dated 28.10.2024 passed in these Civil Applications directed the appellant to comply with the provision by granting benefits under section 17B of the ID Act from the date of filing of Civil Applications i.e. from 15.03.2023 onwards only to the employees who have filed the affidavit along with the Civil Applications under section 17B of the ID Act.

4. The learned Single Judge, while passing the aforesaid order, has observed as under:

“3. Considering the submission made by both the parties and averments made in the application as well as in the reply filed by the opponent wherein, with regard to gainful employment no incriminating evidence placed along with affidavit. The submission of learned advocate Mr.Bhatt that in absence of any details with regard to the address it would be difficult for the opponent herein to verify the details. However, no such contentions in raised in the reply which is filed on 04.05.2023, even after 04.05.2023 though, more than six months has been passed but till date no controverting material was placed before this Court to show that applicants are gainfully employed elsewhere.

4. At this stage object of section 17B is required to be kept in mind. Section 17 -B is inserted by Act No.46 of 1982 and it has become effective since 21st August, 1984. The reason for which this section is inserted is apparent. A judicial notice can be taken of the fact that of the two, that is, employer and employee, the employer is mightier while the employee is weak not only economically but in its overall position. It is also not unknown that after adjudication by the Labour Court or the Tribunal in favour of an employee, filing of an appeal before the High Court or a higher forum, is a matter of routine practice and after filing of such an appeal obtaining `interim order' seeking stay against the execution, operation and implementation of the order of the Court of the first instance is also not uncommon. This used to result into leaving the employee high and dry despite an order passed in his favour. It is also a known fact that there was no certainty as to how long the said agony will last as once the appeal is admitted, factor of uncertainty sets in and, therefore, to overcome that difficulty, the present section is introduced on the Statute Book. The object is to help an employee to subsist and survive.

5. The applicants were terminated from the service in the year 2003 and award was passed by the learned labour court on 26.05.2016 challenging the above aforesaid award petitions are filed before this Court on 13.02.2017 which was admitted by this Court

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top