"15. According to me, while deciding the issue of back wages, the Learned Labour Court has totally ignored the aspect that the Complainant in his earlier Affidavit-inChief, filed on 30-06-2005, had stated that he had made efforts for employment after his dismissal, however due to his stigmatic dismissal, he was not able to get any employment. It is also worthwhile to understand that the fact in respect of gainful employment of the Complainant was brought by the Petitioner for the first time in Writ Petition before Hon'ble High Court, when it received documents from the Provident Fund Department showing that the Complainant was employed elsewhere after his dismissal. The Hon'ble High Court in the Writ Petition considered these aspects and remanded the matter to Learned Labour Court for enquiry only with respect to entitlement of the Complainant to back wages. Thereafter for the first time after the matter was remanded, the Complainant disclosed in his subsequent Affidavit that he was working elsewhere after the dismissal. Therefore, it is a clear cut case of perjury by the complainant, which is quite evident from the record."
