NARAYAN V PATIL Vs. LALITA ARTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition impugns the award passed by the 6th Labour Court at Mumbai on 3/4/1995 thereby allowing Reference (IDA) No.692 of 1993. The Labour Court was pleased to direct reinstatement of the petitioner in his usual position with continuity of service with effect from 16/9/1992 and he was denied the benefit of backwages. Hence this petition is limited to the challenge of denial of backwages as the petitioner has succeeded on the demand of reinstatement. He claims that he ought to have been reinstated with full backwages.

(2.) Mr.Ganguli has placed reliance on the decision in the case of S. G. Chemicals and Dyes Trading Employees Union Vs. S.G. Chemicals and Dyes Trading Limited & anr. 490] [LLJ 1986 SC 490]. It was contended by Mr.Ganguli that it could not be conclusively proved before the Labour Court regarding the gainful employment of the petitioner during the intervening period and the onus squarely fell on the employer to prove the same.

(3.) Having heard Mr.Ganguli, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Prashant Sawant, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and on perusal of the R. & P., I am satisfied that no interference is called for in the impugned award for the following reasons: