Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1988 DIGILAW 750 (SC)

Jamal Ahmad v. Union Bank of India, Lucknow

1988-10-31

K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY

body1988
ORDER : K. Jagannatha Shetty, J. 1. Special Leave granted. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and we are of opinion that the High Court erred in making the order dated 31 March, 1988 declining to vacate the stay order granted in favour of the respondent. Plainly, the provisions of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 were attracted to the case and upon the affidavit filed by the appellant the High Court should have granted relief under that provision, specially when the allegation in the affidavit of non-employment was not controverted by the respondent-Bank. 3. In the circumstances, we allow this appeal set aside the impugned order of the High Court and modify the interim order dated 21 May, 1986 in so far that we direct the payment of wages accruing during the pendency of the Writ Petition in the High Court in accordance with the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act. There respondent Bank will pay the wages arising during the pendency of the Writ Petition and accruing to date within four weeks from today and will continue to pay the wages thereafter during the pendency of the Writ Petition. 4. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.