MATURI VENKATA SUBBA RAO Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. D. Jagan Mohan Reddy, learned proxy counsel appearing for the appellant states that he has been instructed to state that the respondent No.3 has expired. He is, however, not in a position to give the date of demise. He further states that instead of pressing the present appeal, the appellant may be permitted to pursue the petition filed by it before the learned Single Judge, registered as W.P.No.2321 of 2017.

(2.) We have enquired from learned counsel for the appellant whether the appellant has paid the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the respondent No.3 as directed by the Labour Court in lieu of his reinstatement, particularly when no interim order has been operating in favour of the appellant in all this duration. Surprisingly, the reply is in the negative. In other words, the appellant has been retaining the amount that was payable to the respondent No.3 in all this duration without any interim order operating in its favour.

(3.) Learned counsel states that since the respondent No.3 has expired, he will advise his client to release the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- along with interest as awarded by the Labour Court as long back as on 16.09.2016.