HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7832/2017

Manager H R Next Retail India Ltd And Or

----Petitioner

Versus

Smt Megha Mishra

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr.Punit Singhvi

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr.Kunal Rawat

Mr.Rajaram

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

Order

25/01/2023

The matter comes up on miscellaneous application, filed on

behalf of the respondent, for release of the amount deposited in

the Labour Court No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur.

Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the

Coordinate Bench of this Court, on 26^th May, 2017 while issuing

notices in the writ petition filed by the petitioner-employer,

directed them to deposit the entire amount, determined by the

Labour Court within a week.

Learned counsel submitted that however a condition was put

by the court that the amount, so deposited, was not to be

disbursed without prior permission of the Court.

Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the

petitioner, in pursuance of the directions given by the Court,

deposited a cheque No.848466 on 02^nd June, 2017.

(2 of 3)

[CW-7832/2017]

Learned counsel submitted that the respondent is a poor

widow lady, who has not been reinstated back and she is in dire

need of money, which is lying in the Labour Court.

Learned counsel further submitted that validity of the

cheque, so deposited by the petitioner, has already expired on 02^nd

September, 2017 and as such, this Court may be pleased to direct

the petitioner-establishment to issue new cheque and to submit

the same in the Labour Court and further, the amount, so

deposited, may be ordered to be released in favour of the

respondent.

Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted

that this Court, finding prima facie case in favour of the

petitioners, has passed stay order.

Learned counsel further submitted that the issue of

jurisdiction is also involved in the present writ petition as whether

the appliation, filed by the respondent, was maintainable under

the Rajasthan Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1958.

Learned counsel further submitted that if the prayer sought

by the respondent is granted, the entire writ petition itself will

become infructuous.

Learned counsel further submitted that the amount, so

awarded by the Labour Court, is only for a specific period, i.e.,

from June, 2010 to September, 2012 and for rest of the period,

the respondent-employee may also claim the benefit of backwages

after computation and as such, it could affect merits of the case,

not only before this Court but before the Labour Court as well.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel

for the parties.

(3 of 3)

[CW-7832/2017]

This Court finds that the respondent has got an order in her

favour, whereby an application under Section 33(C)(2) of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, filed by her, was allowed on 21^st

April, 2016 and further the petitioners had also complied with the

directions, given by this Court for depositing the amount.

This Court finds that the cheque, so deposited by the

petitioners, has lost its validity.

Accordingly, this Court directs that the petitioner would

deposit the amount, as was directed by Labour Court vide order

dated 21^st April, 2016 within a period of three weeks and the

respondent-employee would be entitled for payment of such

amount to be deposited by the petitioners and she will also give

an undertaking before the Labour Court that in case, the writ

petition of the petitioners will be allowed, she would be required to

refund the entire amount.

This Court also makes it clear that payment to the

respondent-employee, in pursuance of the Court’s order, will not

affect merits of the case and the petitioners would be free to raise

all the contentions to challenge the impugned order.

The application stands allo