SBCWP2252/1997 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2252/1997 {Dy. Chief Wild Life Warden, Forest Department, Udaipur Vs. Shri Chaturbhuj and Another} Date of Order ::: 04.02.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri M.S. Kachhawa, Additional Government Counsel, for petitioner None present for respondents #### By the Court:- Since no one appeared on behalf of respondents in second round also, arguments of learned Additional Government Counsel, appearing on behalf of petitioner, were heard. Shri M.S. Kachhawa, learned Additional Government Counsel, appearing on behalf of petitioner, submitted that learned Labour Court was wholly unjustified in directing payment of back wages to respondent-workman for the period from 01.05.1986 till the date of Award i.e. 25.09.1996, together with interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum. The counsel submitted that findings recorded by learned Labour Court in the Award are contradictory; on the one hand, the learned Labour Court found SBCWP2252/1997 // 2 // the charge of theft against the respondent- workman proved, and, on the other hand, it has held him entitled to back wages for the aforesaid period, by postponing the date of dismissal from 01.05.1986 to 25.09.1996, the date on which the award was passed. Learned Additional Government Counsel submitted that the respondent-workman was appointed as cattle- guard but he failed to discharge his duty to protect the forest, and, on the contrary, was found indulging in theft of grass. He was, therefore, removed from the services. No domestic enquiry was necessary in such a matter especially when he was caught red handed. Having heard learned Additional Government Counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned Award, I find that even though the charge of theft of grass from the forest-area may have been found proved by petitioner but that was taken as proved by the learned Labour Court only on the basis of evidence led before it. No domestic enquiry was held by the petitioner prior to terminating services of the respondent workman, and, therefore, the learned Labour Court directed that the date of removal of respondent-workman from the service should be postponed from SBCWP2252/1997 // 3 // 01.05.1986 to 25.09.1996, the date of Award. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the charge found proved and length of time for which the back wages has been awarded, I deem it proper to partly modify the Award by directing that the respondent-workman shall be entitled to only 50% of back wages. The direction of the learned Labour Court for award of interest at the rate of 12% per annum, is also set-aside. The writ petition is accordingly allowed in part. The aforesaid payment shall be made to the respondent-workman within a period of four months from today. A copy of this judgment be endorsed to the respondent-workman for information. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//