:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1637 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 1637 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 1637 OF 2008 M/s. Amersey Damodar ..Petitioner versus Rashtriya Cotton Kamgar General Union ..Respondents Mr. V. P. Vaidya for the Petitioner. Mr. S. N. Deshpande for the Respondents. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. DATE : 30TH JULY, 2008. DATE : 30TH JULY, 2008. DATE : 30TH JULY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . . . Heard. 2. By this petition, the employer has challenged the Award of the First Labour Court, Mumbai, directing 50% of back wages to the workmen w.e.f. 30.6.1986 till the date of their reinstatement. The order of reinstatement has already been passed and upheld by this court. This court had remanded the matter back to the Labour Court for considering the question of back wages. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order of back wages was not justified in view of the letter dated 31.5.1986 to both the workmen informing them that their services :2: are being terminated w.e.f 30.6.1986, the petitioners are "trying to accommodate you in our sister concern at the same salary paid to you from 1.7.1986." According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the workmen admittedly received this communication but did not accept the offer of re-employment and therefore the court is not justified in granting them back wages. 4. Having considered the matter there appears to be no merit in this contention. It is rightly observed by the trial court that the petitioner did not offer to transfer their services to the sister concern instead of termination, and, in any case did not make a firm offer of appointment. It is noteworthy that the letter does not disclose name of any particular sister concern and does not make a firm offer of appointment. The Labour Court was therefore correct in observing that this was not an offer of appointment in the real sense. In fact the Labour Court has reduced the quantum of back wages by 50%. It is not known whether the workmen made any attempt to get employed in the sister concern. The Order of the Labour Court is a fair and proper order and does not call for any interference. Writ Petition is therefore dismissed. :3: (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.)