/!~^\ s»s HiGHCQURTO£CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR- WR1T EETLTION JiQJ 703 OF 20Q6 c^ PETITIONER RESPONDENTS 2. 3. Nawab Khan S/o Kutub Khan Age about 34 years, (Driver) R/o Near Old Bridge, New Sarkanda Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (CG). Versus Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corp. through Managing Director, Shastri Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corpn. Through Its Divisional Manager Bilaspur (C.G.) The State Industrial Court, Through: Its Chairman Raipur Gowri 4. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bilaspur (C.G.) (Writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : hlon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- IVIr. S.P.Kale, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Das Vaishnav and Mr. Sameer Sahu, counsel fdr' CIDC. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 25th day of June,2009) Heard. 2) By this petition, the petitioner/employee, seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the order dated 08.07.2005 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Industrial Court, Raipur, in Appeal No. 114/CGIR/A-11/2004, (Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation & Anr, v. Nawab Khan) whereby the appeal preferred by the respondent employer has been allowed setting aside the order dated 29.04.2004 (Annexure P/2) passed by the Labour Court, Bilaspur, in Case No. 274/CGIR/1-A/03 (Nawab Khan v. Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation & Anr.), whereby the case of the petitioner has been allowed and directed the respondent employer toreinstate the petitioner in sen/ice without back-wages. 3) The petitioner is also aggrieved by the common order dated 08.07.2005 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Industrial Court, Raipur in Cross Appeal No. 98/CGIR/A-11/2004 (Nawab Khan v. Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation & Anr,), whereby the prayer made by the petitioner herein for grant of back-wages has been rejected. Thus, this petition is for reinstatement as well as for grant of back-wages. 3) At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/employee submits that the petitioner is ready to forgo the back wages part, if the respondent/employer reinstates the petitioner in service, to which learned counsel appearing for the respondenVCIDC has no objection. In this regard a written consent has been submitted by both the parties. 4) In view of foregoing, without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Consequently, interim order passed earlier, if any, is vacated. ' - Satish K. Agnihotri Judge