IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3442 of 2007 Rameshwar Rai, Son of Teman Rai, Resident of Village- Kamure Madhopur, P.S. Jandaha, Distt. Vaishali -------- Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Patna. 2. The Director, Jaidaks Motor Co. Ltd. Jaidaks House, Exhibition Road, Patna. 3. Chairman, Jaidaks Motor Co. Ltd. 77, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Calcutta- 700026 ------ -------- Respondents. ---------- 2. 20.10.2008 Heard Mr. Dhananjay Mishra for the petitioner, and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned Government Pleader No. VIII, for the respondents. The petitioner claims to be an employee of the respondent Jaidka Motor Co. Ltd. His services were dispensed with leading to a complaint under section 26 of the Bihar Shops and Establishment Act before the learned Labour Court, Patna which was numbered as B.S.E. Case No. 45 of 1994. The same was allowed by the order dated 18.8.2006 (Annexure-2), passed by the learned Labour Court, whereby the order of dismissal was set aside. The petitioner raises the grievance that he is not being reinstated. It relates to execution of the order of the learned Labour Court and, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable in so far as the issue relating to the petitioner’s reinstatement is concerned. In so far as the second grievance is concerned, namely, non-payment of back-wages, it appears that the issue was considered 2 by the learned Labour Court and has held that the petitioner is not entitled to back-wages because, during the period he was not in employment of Jaidka Motor Co. Ltd., he was gainfully employed elsewhere. To my mind, this is a well-recognized and valid reason to deny back-wages. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar , J.)