9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (9) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntifying the, compensation payable to the workman in this case to sum of Rs. 20,000 only in lieu of reinstatement with full back-wages as ordered by the Tribunal, which we accordingly order. " The respondent was accordingly required to pay Rs. 20,000 only in lieu of his reinstatement. In order to fully grasp the meaning of the operative portion of the judgment, it may be recalled that in an earlier round of litigation between the parties, the Industrial Tribunal made an award directing " reinstatement of the workman (present appellant) with 50% of his back-wages for the period of his forced unemployment as compensation. " After this award, the respondent-company paid lip sympathy by reinstating the appellant but again terminated his servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the order of termination in an application under s. 33A. By a certificate granted by the High Court under art. 133(1)(c) of the Constitution, the appellant preferred the aforementioned appeal to this court. This court disposed of the appeal in terms as hereinabove extracted. The operative order of the judgment of this court clearly spells out the responsibility of the respondent to pay Rs. 20,000 without any deduction therefrom to the appellant. The respondent while implementing the judgment of this court deducted Rs. 2,145 from the amount of Rs. 20,000 directed to be paid to the appellant on the ground that as the amount was being paid as back-wages, the employer was under an obligation to deduct the income-tax payable at source. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ucting Rs. 2,145 from the compensation amount of Rs. 20,000 awarded by this court to the appellant. The respondent company is, accordingly, directed to pay Rs. 2,145 with 15% interest from May 7, 1976, till payment. It was contended by Mr. Saharya that compensation in the amount of Rs. 20,000 was awarded by this court in lieu of reinstatement and back wages. On a correct interpretation of the judgment of the court, the sub mission does not commend to us. The operative part of the judgment which has been extracted hereinbefore clearly spells out that the compensation in the amount of Rs. 20,000 was awarded only in lieu of reinstatement. The Tribunal had awarded back-wages and that judgment was being restored by this court and, therefore, on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
