Hari Mohan Rastogi vs Labour Court And Anr. on 14 September, 1983 Equivalent citations: AIR1984SC502, [1984(48)FLR294], 1983LABLC1906, (1984)ILLJ32SC, 1984SUPP(1)SCC428, 1984(1)SLJ243(SC), AIR 1984 SUPREME COURT 502, 1983 LAB. I. C. 1906, 1984 UPLBEC 454, 1983 UJ (SC) 901, (1984) UPLBEC 454, (1984) 1 LABLJ 32, (1984) 48 FACLR 294, (1984) 1 LAB LN 89, (1984) 1 SERVLJ 243 Bench: A. Varadarajan, D.A. Desai, O. Chinnappa Reddy ORDER 1. We heard Mr. A.P. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. S. Markandeya, learned Counsel for respondents. 2. In view of fee decision of this Court in Mohan Lal v. Management of Bharat Electronics Ltd. dated April 21, 1981 , the termination of service of the appellant by respondent U.P. State Electricity Board, Lucknow on and from December 31, 1967 will constitute retrenchment and prerequisite for a valid order of retrenchment being absent has to be treated as invalid and inoperative. The appellant will continue to be in service as Town-in charge continuously without interruption and any break from the date of ineffective termination of service. 3. Now that the appellant continues to be in service as town-in-charge, he will be entitled to arrears of salary and other benefits which can be computed in terms of money. One peculiar feature of this case is that the appellant was re-employed afresh as Sub-Station Assistant on December 4, 1968 and was confirmed in that post. While rendering his service as Sub-Station Assistant he was in receipt of monthly salary. Therefore, while working out the monetary benefit with regard to the arrears of back-wages and other monetary benefits, credit will have to be given for what the appellant has received as and by way of salary and all other allowances. 4. Mr. Markandeya for the employer stated that on the computation made by the respondent-Management, it will have to pay Rs. 13,000/- and odd to the appellant. This amount will be paid by respondent-Management to the appellant within one month from today and the appellant will accept the same without prejudice to all his contentions. 5. As the appellant does not accept the computation made by the respondent-management, it would be necessary to determine the monetary benefit to which Appellant would be entitled. In this connection, we would like to follow a precedent in CMP learned Counsel 15708 of 1981 in C.A. learned Counsel 364 of 1981 wherein in similar circumstances, we directed the Labour Court to compute the benefits which the appellant was entitled to, pursuant to the decision of this Court. Hari Mohan Rastogi vs Labour Court And Anr. on 14 September, 1983  1 6. We, therefore, direct that the appellant shall be re-posted as Town-in-charge forthwith and not later than a fortnight from today. We direct the Labour Court to compute the back-wages payable by respondent to the appellant pursuant to this decision and this computation may be both of monetary benefits and non-monetary benefits to which the appellant is entitled after giving credit for the amount of Rs. 13,000/- which would be paid to the appellant within one month from today. The balance shall be paid within such reasonable time as may be determined by the Labour Court. The Labour Court do compute monetary and no monetary benefits within a period of six months from today. The report will also be submitted to this Court. Respondent shall pay Rs. 1,000/- at and by way of costs to the appellant. Hari Mohan Rastogi vs Labour Court And Anr. on 14 September, 1983  2