Malwa Vanaspati & Chemical Co.Ltd vs Rajendra

Malwa Vanaspati & Chemical Co. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

Rajendra ..Respondent

JUDGMENT

TARUN CHATTERJEE,J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Delay condoned.

3. On 11th of January, 2008, this Court passed the

following order :-

"Issue notice limited to question whether the respondent was entitled to full back wages or not. Issue notice also on the application for condonation of delay."

4. The respondent filed an application before the

Labour Court alleging that he was illegally terminated by

an oral order dated 5th of March, 1998 and that he was 2

not given any Show Cause Notice nor was he paid

retrenchment compensation.

5. The appellant contested the said application alleging

that the services of the respondent had not been

terminated and since the services had not been

terminated, the question of payment of retrenchment

compensation or issuance of Show Cause Notice did not

arise at all.

6. In February, 2000, in the light of the above matter,

the Labour Court directed the respondent to report for

duty and it is now an admitted position that the

respondent reported for duty on that date.

7. By a final award, the Labour Court passed an award

on 27th of September, 2002, directing the appellant to

take him on duty and directed payment of back wages.

In appeal, the Industrial Court dismissed the appeal of

the appellant.

3

8. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid

award passed by the Labour Court, the appellant filed a

writ petition, which was also dismissed by the High

Court. A Special Leave Petition against the order of the

High Court dismissing the writ petition and affirming the

award of the Labour Court has been filed, which on grant

of leave, was heard in the presence of the learned counsel

for the parties.

9. Since a limited notice was issued on the question

whether the respondent was entitled to full back wages or

not, we did not go into the question of reinstatement or

otherwise. On the aspect of payment of full back wages,

we are of the view that the appellant had already taken

the respondent in service and considering the fact that

the case of the appellant was that he was not terminated

at all, we are of the view that in the facts and

circumstances of the case, the back wages should be

paid to the extent of 50 per cent (50%) of the salary.

Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal by modifying the

award to the extent that the employee/respondent would 4

be entitled to back wages to the extent of 50 per cent

(50%) and not full back wages.

10. The award is accordingly modified and the order of

the High Court is set aside in part. The appeal is

disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.

..............................J. [TARUN CHATTERJEE]

..............................J. [H. L. DATTU] NEW DELHI;

April 28, 2009.