Allowed

Sunit Kumar Mishra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Jul 2022WA/125/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ appeal challenging a High Court Single Judge's order awarding ex-gratias in lieu of reinstatement, the division bench allowed the appeal by relying on a sibling case. The impugned order was set aside, and the Labour Court award directing reinstatement was restored.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 20.09.2021 set aside; Labour Court award restoring service with 20% back wages affirmed.

Sunit Kumar Mishra Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WA No. 125 of 2022

¶5

Sunit Kumar Mishra S/o Shri R.S Mishra Aged About 52 Years R/o Jabra Para, Gali No. 02, Sarkanda, Police Station Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Health And Family Welfare Department, Medical Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Police Station Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

The Director Medical Education, Health And Family Welfare Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

The Superintendent Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Sciences (Cims), Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

The Dean Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Sciences (Cims), Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

---- Respondents

¶13

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶14

For Appellant : Mr. Sunil Kumar Soni, Advocate. For Respondents : Ms. Astha Shukla, Government Advocate.

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu , Judge

¶17

Judgment on Board

¶18

Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

¶19

21.07.2022

¶20

Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Soni, learned counsel for the appellant as

¶21

well as Ms. Astha Shukla, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents.

¶22

¶23

Challenge in this writ appeal is to the legality, validity and correctness of the order dated 20.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (L) No. 172 of 2017 partly allowing the writ petition filed by the State / petitioners whereby the learned Single Judge modified the Award dated 05.05.2017 (pronounced on 06.06.2017) passed in Case No. 9/I.D.Act/Ref./2013 by the Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act (for short, ‘I.D. Act’), Bilaspur, in which, the Labour Court has answered the reference in favour of the workers / employees holding that the discontinuance of services of ten workers / employees was unjustified and illegal and has thus ordered for reinstatement in services with 20% of back wages.

¶24

By an order dated 20.09.2021, the learned Single Judge, partly allowing the writ petition, directed that the workers / employees would be entitled to an amount of Rs.50,000/- for each year of service that they have rendered with the State Government, i.e. for 5 years, and therefore, they would be entitled to a total amount of Rs.2,50,000/- each as compensation in lieu of reinstatement as full and final settlement of the claim.

¶25

The learned counsel for the parties submit that this appeal is squarely covered by the judgment dated 30.06.2022 passed in WA No.8 of 2022 and as such, similar directions may be issued in this case.

¶26

WA No. 8 of 2022 was preferred by seven out of ten workers / employees.

¶27

¶28

Paragraph 30 of the judgment dated 30.06.2022, is re-produced as follows:

¶29

“30. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and the award passed by the Labour Curt is restored / affirmed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.”

¶30

In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, in terms of the judgment dated 30.06.2022 passed in WA No.8 of 2022, this appeal is allowed and impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and the award passed by the Labour Court is restored / affirmed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.

¶31

Sd/- Sd/(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Parth Prateem Sahu ) Chief Justice Judge

¶32

Hem

Sunit Kumar Mishra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunit Kumar Mishra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Durga Sharan Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Subir Sen Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Jayanti Ghanshyam Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sunil Kumar Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh Vs Mallika BAl

Rajesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh