@ H {3H CGURT ()F {TEiiATTiSGAw AT BELASPUR WRKT PETYHON No. 2055 0f2002 Dmsmn. St Le oi \AP (Now CG) Pea — Rhaxmgarh Dist Ramwdoaon WRET ?ET§'§ION UNDER ARTECLE; 227 OF 1 H11. LON STITUTION OF INDIA SE; Han’Me 531m Saiish K. Aggihatri. J. E’rssent: %ri H R Agrawa}, Senim Advocate with Shri i3anka§ Aorawal, Ammaie for {he petmonel Shn Arun gao Govemmem Advocate for the §tate/respot1dent \Io 2 ORAL ORBER (Passed on (238m day of July, 2%8) By this petition; the petitioner impugns ihe award dated 10.01.2GO2 (Annexu're PS) to the extent of denial ofback-wages. The petitioner has not taid any founoation for gtant of back—wages in the Comt be1ow‘ On reading ofthe impugned awardt it ts clear that the petitioner has not even oressed for ga‘zmt of back,—w3ges. 3. It is well settleé. principle of law that back-wages can be awarded when the employee esta’olishes that he was not gainfully employed elsewhere. For want of evidence and documents, it cannot be held that the petitioner was not empioyecl elSeWhere, gatofutly. Thus, there is no merit in this case as no case has heen made out for. gram ofhack-Wages. 4. Aocordingty. the petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. Sdl- I Satish K. Agnihotn Judge Ami: PETITIONER Rameshwar Vishvakarma S/o Jagtu RJ’o Village Magm‘kund Post Pailimeta Sub Tehsii — Gandai, Tehsi’i w Chuikhadan, Distt. Rajnandgam (CG) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. Pmsiéiing Officer, La§30ur Court Rajnandgaon (CG) 2. Diviqional Foxest OffECBa General Forest