A. P. Thaker, J. - (1.)The petition has been filed by the original respondent challenging the award dated 6.3.2013 passed by the learned Labour Court, Bhavnagar in reference (LCB) No. 13 of 2001 whereby the learned Labour Court has allowed the reference in favour of the respondent workman and directed reinstatement of the workman with 70% backwages from 1.1.1996 along with consequential benefit payable to him within a period of 30 days from the date of the award.
(2.)Heard Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned AGP for the petitioner employer and Mr. Yogen Pandya, learned advocate for the respondent workman through video-conferencing.
(3.)Mr. Joshi, learned AGP submits that now the workman was reinstated in service as there was no stay against his reinstatement. He has submitted that the only question remains is regarding the order of the learned Labour Court granting 70% of the backwages to the workman. While referring to the petition memo as well as the materials placed on record, learned AGP has submitted that the learned Labour Court has committed serious error of fact and law in granting the order of reinstatement as well as granting 70% backwages to the workman. According to him, there is no reasons put provided by the learned Labour Court in granting 70% backwages. Learned AGP has submitted that the learned Labour Court has committed serious error of facts and law in granting the relief to the workman regarding reinstatement. He has also submitted that learned Labour Court has not considered the written statement placed on record by the Department and has not followed the various decisions rendered by this Court in various matters. According to him, there is perversity in the award passed by the learned Labour Court and has prayed to allow the present petition and set aside the impugned award passed by the learned Labour Court in favour of the workman.