U2'*"- -Sk' ^y ^ ^ •/.-0^-^7 /--' IN THE HIGH GOURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR W.A.No. $^ /2009 (Arising out of order dated 12-08-2008 passed by the Single Bench of this High.Court, Hon'ble Justice Shri S.K. Agnihotri inW.P. NQ. 41.13/2004) APPELLANT PETITIONER : ^ M/s. Cement Corporation of India Ltd, Akaltara Cement Factoiy, through its General Manager, Akaltara, Distt. JanjgirChampa (C.G.) . ^ VERSUS RESPONDENTS '<ffiA l^i^-^^iil ^@J ^^--1 (l)Rajbahadur Singh, S/o. Late Indra Bhushan Singh, Pormer, H.E.O. C.C.I., Akaltara; R/o. Purani Basti, Akalfara, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G. (2) The Industrial Court through its Chairman, Raipur (C.G.) ^(3) The presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) WRITAPPEAL UNDER SECTION 2'dLOF THE CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT (APPEAL TO THE DIVISION BENCH1ACT, 2006. I 1 .M Q>^ N! HIGH CQURT QF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR W,A,Np,58of2Q09 AppeUaat M/sCementCorporationofIndiaLtd. Versus Respondents Rajbahadur Siagh & otheis— WRITAPPEALUNDER SECTION 2(1) OF THE CHHATTISGARH HIQH COURT (APPEALTO DIVISON BENCH1 ACT, 2006 DB: HoaTile Mr. I. M. Quddusi, 6s Hon'ble Mr. N. K. Agaiwal, JJ. Shri Viaod Deshinukii, Advocate forthe appeUaat. Shri T. K.Tiwan, Advocate for the icspondent No. 1. ORDERtorall ( Passed on this 29ttl day ofJune, 2010) Per I. M. Ouddasl, J. Heard learaed counsel appeanug for the appeUant as weU as leam.ed counsel appearmg for the respondent No. l. This appeal has been filed against fhe iaipugaed order dated 121:l' August, 2008, passed by fhe learaed Single Judge ia W. P. No. 4113/ 2004, dismissiag the writ petition. Brieffacts ofthe case are that the respondent No. 1 was engaged iu service by the appellaat on 17.9.1979. He was removed from semce on 20.1.2003 after conductuig a departmeutal enquiry. A crinunal case was also registered agamst the respondent No.l, whereia Ile was acquitted by the Sessions Court in appeal. Being aggncved by fhe order ofremoval the respondent No. 1 filed an. application before fhe Labour Court which was allowed aud the appella&t was directed ^ to reinstate fh.e respondent No. 1 with fuU back wages. Oa appeal, fhe Industrial Court upheld fhe order of rem.stateinent but graated only 50% back wages. Learaed Siagle Judge has uphetd the order • : i-t % fc 1' r 5. passed by the Industrial Court aad disniissed the writ petition filed by the appeUaiit. Leamed couxisel appearixig for fhe appeUant has urged that50% of . fhe back w^es should have beea awarded-Iroin fhe date of acquittal aud not from. fhe date of renioval. Siace the departniental euquiry has been held against the respondent No.l aad he was reiuoved fi?oiu fhe service, fhe question ofhis acquittal or conviction does not arise when fhe departinental proceediags were held. More over,50% backwages only have been aUowed, therefore, fhere is no occasion for iuterference by fhis Court ia the order passed by fhe leamed Siagle Judge. In view of fhe above, fhe writ appeal is inisconceived and fherefore disniissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- • LM-Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K.Agrawal Judge Thakur