Order
1. Leave granted.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the High Court should not have interfered with the quantum of damages awarded by the Labour Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court had directed payment of compensation keeping in view the fact that the respondent was a project employee and was not in service since June 1990. We do not find any justification for the High Court to arrive at a conclusion that reinstatement with 50% back wages will meet the ends of justice.
3. We, therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in modification of the order passed by the High Court, direct that the respondent shall be entitled to be paid a sum of Rs 50,000. See State of M.P v. Arjunlal Rajak (2006) 2 SCC 711, (2006) 2 Scale 610, Nagar Mahapalika v. State of U.P (2006) 5 SCC 127, (2006) 5 Scale 145 and Haryana State Electronics Development Corpn. Ltd. v. Mamni (2006) 9 SCC 434, (2006) 5 Scale 164.
4. It is stated by Mr Aruneshwar Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellants that the awarded amount has already been deposited. The respondent shall be entitled to withdraw the said amount together with interest, if any. The appellant shall pay to the respondent and/or deposit a sum of Rs 27,000 before the Labour Court within eight weeks from today, failing which the said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from date till the actual date of payment/deposit.
5. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.