1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5113 OF 2009 (The Executive Engineer, PWD No.1 vs. Smt. Brijula Kisan Ramteke ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. FEBRUARY 17, 2010. Heard finally by consent of Shri Thakare, learned AGP for the petitioner and Shri Issac, learned counsel for the respondent. The grievance made by the learned AGP is as compensation is already awarded in lieu of reinstatement, grant of back wages for the period of nine years is unsustainable. He states that there is no pleading or evidence of absence of gainful employment in the matter. He seeks to rely upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of U.P. State Brassware Corporation Ltd. vs. Uday Narain Pandey (2006) 1 SCC 479, in support of his contention. Shri Issac, learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, states that the amount of compensation granted is inadequate and, therefore, back wages for entire length of terminated period are awarded. He states that initially the salary was only Rs. 140/- per month only and it was increased to Rs.1,000/- 2 per month. He places reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. vs. K.P. Agrawal, reported at (2007) 2 SCC 433. After hearing parties, I find that the respondent has worked for about 12 years on consolidated salary. Her initial salary was Rs.140/- per month and at the time of her termination, she was getting Rs.1,000/- per month. She claimed to have terminated orally on 06.08.1998 without cause or reason while the petitioner claimed that she has absconded. The findings recorded by Labour Court in this respect are not seriously disputed before me. However, the material on record does not show the basis on which labour Court has found the respondent entitled to back wages from 06.08.1998 till delivery of award on 21.09.2007. Shri Issac, learned counsel fairly states that in stead of remanding the matter again for said exercise, the respondent should be awarded 50% back wages. However, considering the position above, I find it in the fitness of things to modify the award by holding the respondent entitled to 50% of back wages for the period from 06.08.1998 till 21.09.2007. The compensation of Rs.25,000/- in lieu of reinstatement is not very reasonable and hence grant of 50% back wages is warranted. The petitioner shall pay the amount of back wages so calculated to the respondent by 31st May 2010. 3 If the amount is not paid by said date, it will carry interest @ 9% per annum till its realization. Writ Petition is partly allowed. Rule accordingly. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.