1. Both the advocates have submitted that as there is a word against a word, this Court may pass appropriate orders so that anxiety at both the ends be taken care of.
2. Shri Ravindra Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the willingness evinced by the employer right from the day when the matter was at large before the Labour Court continues if the respondent is reporting for duty. They are ready and willingness to take her and reinstate her and give her the same work, which she was doing prior to the alleged termination. Unfortunately, the respondent has not reported for duty despite there being order of this Court on 21st October, 2008.
3. Shri Mukesh H. Rathod, learned advocate for the respondent submitted that as per his instructions the respondent had reported for duty but she was not permitted to resume her duty. Now, if she is permitted she would be reporting for duty on 1st September, 2009 and she will carry with her duty report, which may duly be signed by the responsible officer of the petitioner. The respondent will abide by the rules and regulations and with utmost diligence shall discharge her duties and maintain discipline.
4. In view of this, the Court is of the view that the petition be posted on 18th September, 2009. The respondent shall report for duty on 1st September, 2009 and the petitioner shall reinstate her.
5. If there is some dispute, it is open to parties to file appropriate application before this Court irrespective of the date on which the matter is adjourned.
(S.
R. Brahmbhatt, J.) sudhir Top