Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2021 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 916 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - honourable acquittal - full exoneration - conviction of the respondent u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act - claim for backwages - HELD THAT:- It has been averred in the complaint before the Labour Court that during the period of his conviction and acquittal, the respondent was not gainfully employed. The fact of acquittal of the respondent by this Court, was made aware to the petitioner, in March, 2011 itself, which is indicated from the application for amendment filed before the Labour Court (Annexure-B/pg.13), pursuant to which the petitioner, ought to have reinstated the respondent in service, in March, 2011 itself, since the reason for his termination, did not survive and could have availed the benefit of the services of the respondent till the time of his superannuation. The petitioner, for reasons, best known to it, did not do so and forced the respondent to continue with the litigation before the Labour Court, which resulted in the direction for his reinstatement with continuity in services and 50% back wages. Not only this, the petitioner, challenged the said judgment before the Industrial Court by way of a revision during which period, the respondent retired having crossed the age of superannuation. In spite of the dismissal of the revision, as filed by the petitioner, and stay to the effect, operation and execution of the orders passed by the subordinate Courts, except to the extent of the direction to pay 50% back wages, being declined, and a direction to process the claim of the respondent for other retiral benefits, the order dated 11/9/2015, records that this has not been done. This conduct, on part of the petitioner clearly defies logic. In Baldev Singh Vs. Union of India and others, [2005 (10) TMI 600 - SUPREME COURT], relied upon by Mr. Mehadia, learned Counsel for the petitioner, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that merely because there has been an acquittal, it does not automatically entitle the employee to get salary for the period concerned. Thus, the award of 50% back wages, to the respondent, in light of the above position of law, is not sustainable. However, the claim for back wages from the date of acquittal till the date of superannuation, is clearly sustainable in law. The impugned judgement is modified as follows: (A) The direction as passed by the learned Labour Court for reinstatement of the respondent with continuity of service is maintained. (B) The direction as passed by the learned Labour Court to pay 50% back wages is hereby set aside. (C) The petitioner is directed to pay full back wages to the respondent from the date of acquittal, i.e., from 22/2/2011 to the date of superannuation. (D) All the above payments should be made within three months from the date of this order, subject to adjustments of any amounts which may have been received by the respondent earlier.
|