Sanjeev Narula DECISION
Vipin Sanghi, J.
1. We have heard the appellant, who is present in person, as well as learned counsel for the respondent. The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 24.04.2019, passed by the learned Single Judge in C.M. No. 16947/2018 in W.P.(C.) No. 8297/2016. The learned Single Judge has disposed of the said Civil Miscellaneous Application preferred by the appellant under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, who is the respondent in the aforesaid writ petition.
2. The appellant, who was employed with the respondent, was removed from service with effect from 14.10.2009. He raised an industrial dispute and the Labour Court passed an industrial award in his favour directing his reinstatement while finding his termination to be illegal. The respondent, which is a Government owned Company, has preferred the aforesaid writ petition to assail the industrial award directing reinstatement of the appellant.
3. The appellant, upon service in the writ proceedings, filed an application under Section 17 B of the Industrial Disputes Act i.e. C.M. No. 16947/2018 to claim the last drawn wages during pendency of the writ proceedings. It appears that he failed to file an affidavit in support of the application. Vide order dated 25.02.2019, the learned Single Judge noted the said objection raised by the respondent herein, and granted 2 days time to the appellant to file the affidavit in support of the application along with the documents to show his last drawn wages. Accordingly, the appellant filed his affidavit dated 26.02.2019, wherein he, inter alia stated:
"1. That I was an employee of M/s. Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. Pimpri Pune and my service record No. is 4464.
2. That I was removed from service w.e.f. 14.10.2009.
3. That w.e.f. 14.10.2009 I remain unemployed and even presently not employed anywhere.
4. That I was getting gross earnings of 18080.61 (Rs. eighteen thousand eighty and paisa sixty one only) in September 2009 from M/s. Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. Pimpri Pune.
5. That learned labour Court No XVII Delhi in I.D. Case No. 207/16/10 passed award on 2.2.2016 for reinstatement and 100% back wages.
6. That in Sept. 2009 VDA (variable dearness allowance) rate was only 100%."
4. He also annexed with the said affidavit his salary slip evidencing the pay drawn by him for the month of September, 2009.
5. The learned Single Judge, while allowing the application, took notice of the decision of the Supreme Court in Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation v. K.B. Singh, MANU/SC/2830/2005 : (2005) 11 SCC 449. The learned Single Judge observed that in the light of the said decision "the workman shall be entitled for wages under Section 17B from the date of filing of the affidavit." The learned Single Judge noted that the application under Section 17B was filed on 07.07.2017. However, the affidavit in support of the said application was filed by the appellant only on 26.02.2019 in ........