RAGHUVEER SYNTHETICS LIMITED Vs. DHARMABEN KISHANBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned judgement and order dated 20/12/2001 passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad in T Application No. 372/1998 as well as the impugned judgement and order dated 18/12/2003 passed by the Industrial Court, Ahmedabad in Appeal (I.C) No. 22/2002 by which the petitioner is directed to reinstate the respondent-workman with 40% back wages.

(2.) Today, when the petition is taken up for final hearing, in the facts and circumstances of the case and the controversy and the dispute between the parties, the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, under instructions from the respective clients, have stated at the bar that if the respondent is paid lumpsum monetary compensation of Rs. 40,000/- in lieu of reinstatement and back wages as ordered by the Labour Court confirmed by the Industrial Court and the impugned judgement and orders are set aside they have no objection. They do not invite any further reasoned order and they have requested to modify the judgement and order passed by the Labour Court confirmed by the Industrial Court.

(3.) In view of the above, the present petition is allowed in part and the impugned judgement and order dated 20/12/2001 passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad in T Application No. 372/1998 and the impugned judgement and order dated 18/12/2003 passed by the Industrial Court, Ahmedabad in Appeal (I.C.) No. 22/2002 are hereby modified to the extent that in lieu of reinstatement and back wages and continuity of service as directed by the Labour Court confirmed by the Industrial Court, the petitioner to pay a lumpsum monetary compensation of Rs. 40,000/- within a period of six weeks from today. On such a deposit, Registry to pay the said amount to the respondent-workman by an account payee cheque. On payment of the aforesaid amount, there shall not be any claim of the respondent against the petitioner-Company. The petitioner is directed to act stated hereinabove. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No cost.