1. Heard Mr. Pandya, learned counsel for the petitioner society.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had not terminated the services of the respondent, however, on incorrect allegations he raised dispute and approached the Court. He also submitted that even in the reply/written statement filed before the trial Court the petitioner herein had, at the outset, clarified the aforesaid aspect and shown readiness to allow the respondent workman to report for duty, however, it is the respondent who did not report for duty. He clarified that even as of now the petitioner has no objection to allow the respondent to resume his duties.
3. In view of the aforesaid submissions by learned counsel for the petitioner, office is directed to issue Notice to the respondent making it returnable on 12th March 2012, however on the condition that the petitioner society shall forward a written communication to the respondent workman, through Regd. Speed Post, on or before 13th February 2012, asking him to report for duty. The petitioner society shall mention, in the said communication, the date on which the respondent should report for duty, the time at which he should report for duty and the person/officer to whom he should report for duty.
4. On receipt of the said communication, the respondent will report for duty along with joining report, receipt thereof will be acknowledged by the concerned officer.
5. On the returnable date, upon examining as to whether the aforesaid aspects have been complied with or not, the prayer for relief against the direction to pay back-wages at the rate of 50% will be considered. Direct service is permitted.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) jani Top