CaseMinister
CaseMinister › Judgments › Supreme Court › 2014 › M.d.orissa S.h.w.coop.sty.ltd. v. Satyanarayan Pattnaik

M.d.orissa S.h.w.coop.sty.ltd. v. Satyanarayan Pattnaik

Supreme Court of India · 11 February 2014

Court
Supreme Court of India
Decided
11 February 2014
Case no.
C.A. No. 1967-1968 of 2014
Bench
Anil R. Dave, Dipak Misra
Length
3 pages
Have a question about this judgment?

Ask our Legal AI about it on WhatsApp: free, no signup, in English or Hindi.

Write it first.

JUDGMENT

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1967-68 OF 2014 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 16165-16166 of 2012) M.D. ORISSA S.H.W COOP. STY. LTD. .....Appellant

Versus

SATYANARAYAN PATTNAIK & ANR. …..Respondents

JUDGMENT

ANIL R. DAVE, J.

1.
Leave granted.

2. Heard the learned counsel and perused the impugned judgment dated 14th May, 2010 delivered in W.P.(C) No. 10291 of 2006 and order dated 24th October, 2011 in R.P.No.131 of 2010 delivered by the High Court of Orissa.

JUDGMENT

3. The respondent was an employee, who had submitted his application for voluntary retirement under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme dated 9.6.2006 floated by the appellantemployer. Before the final decision in pursuance of the said application was communicated by the appellant-employer to the respondent-employee, the respondent-employee had made a request for withdrawal of the said application and ultimately the appellant-employer had not accepted the application for withdrawal submitted by the respondent-employee and the respondentemployee was made to retire.

4. In view of the fact that his application for voluntary retirement was accepted though the respondent-employee wanted to withdraw the same, the respondent-employee had filed a petition before the High Court, which was allowed and the High Court, by virtue of the impugned judgment, directed that the respondent-employee should be taken in service within two months with full back wages. Even the review petition filed by the appellant had been rejected by the High Court.

5. Keeping the question of law open, looking at the peculiar facts of the case, we feel that the appeal deserves to be allowed to a limited

JUDGMENT

extent by directing the appellant-employer to pay only 20% of the back wages from the date when the respondent ceased to discharge his duties till the date he is reinstated in service.

6. The respondent shall be reinstated in service within two weeks from today.

7. In view of the above order, the appeals stand disposed of as partly allowed with no order as to costs.

……………………….J. (ANIL R. DAVE) ……………………….J. (DIPAK MISRA)

New Delhi
February 11, 2014

Ask CaseMinister about M.d.orissa S.h.w.coop.sty.ltd. v. Satyanarayan Pattnaik

Your 24×7 legal assistant on WhatsApp answers with the judgments that apply, in English or Hindi. No signup needed.

Questions about this judgment, or a case like it?Ask on WhatsApp