1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. C.A. No.5734/07 in WP No. 3443/2006 Zilla Parishad,Wardha Vs. The Presiding Officer and another. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE, J. DATED : 13/06/2008. Heard Mr. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant-respondent no.2 and Mr. Meghe, learned counsel for the petitioner. In this application under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Respondent no.2 has categorically stated that he is unemployed and he has no source of income to maintain himself. In reply filed by the petitioner, it has been stated that the petitioner has received information that respondent no.2 is working as driver on a private taxi and, therefore, he is not unemployed. By filing rejoinder, the respondent no.2 has denied this fact. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that the application filed by respondent no.2 under Section 17-B of the Act deserves to be allowed. Respondent 2 no.2 has made categorical statement in the application that he is unemployed. The stand taken in the reply filed by the petitioner that respondent no.2 is working as driver on a private taxi is vague and, therefore, I have no hesitation to accept the statement made by respondent no.2. In view of the above, the application filed under Section 17-B of the Act is allowed. The petitioner is directed to pay the last drawn wages regularly to respondent no.2 during the pendency and final disposal of this writ petition. Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Ambulkar.