JUDGEMENT
A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. -
(1.) The short question to be considered in this appeal in terms of
order dated 27th August 2012 passed by this Court while issuing
notice to the respondent -Management is: the quantum of the lump
sum amount which needs to be paid to the workmen concerned in
lieu of reinstatement.
(2.) Briefly stated, the appellant raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal at
Dhanbad, for adjudication, as under: -
"Whether the 35 persons whose names are shown in the Annexure and who were employed by M/s. Triveni Engineering Works, a Contractor at Dugda Coal Washery are to be treated as workmen of M/s BCCL and whether the demand of the Coal Washeries Workers Union that these persons be regularized/absorbed in the services of M/s. BCCL is justified? If so, to what relief are these persons entitled -
(3.) The Industrial Tribunal vide award dated 17 th June 1997, answered the reference in favour of the appellant and directed the
Management to reinstate and regularize the concerned 35 workmen
w.e.f. 1st July 1990, with payment of 30% full back wages within
two months from the date of publication of the award in the Official
Gazette of India. The respondent -Management challenged the said
award by way of Writ Petition being Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case
No.3443/1997(R). The learned Single Judge of the High Court of
Jharkhand at Ranchi, vide final judgment dated 6 th May 2003,
dismissed that Writ Petition and affirmed the view taken by the
Tribunal. The respondent carried the matter in appeal by way of
Letters Patent Appeal No.422/2004 before the Division Bench. The
Division Bench vide judgment dated 5 th January 2012, did not
doubt the correctness of the findings of the Industrial Tribunal or
the learned Single Judge on the factum of 35 persons to be treated
as workmen of the respondent. It, however, accepted the plea of the
respondent that after a lapse of more than 20 years from stoppage
of work of the subject workmen, an order of reinstatement will be
inequitable and must be eschewed. The Division Bench, therefore,
modified the award in the following terms:
"We considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties and we are of the view that even the Labour court was of the view that these workmen are not entitled to full back wages in view of the fact that they did not work and the back wages were also awarded w.e.f. 1st July 1990. The workmen worked from 1986 -1990 for which they got their salary/wages and this fact is not in dispute. Thereafter the workmen are getting the benefit of the payment of wages in view of Section 17(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in view of the award dated 19 th July 2007. In view of the above fact that these workmen are not working since 1990, we do not find it equitable to maintain the order to reinstate the employees after 20 years. So far as the compensation in lieu of the reinstatement is concerned, we deem it proper to award Rs.50,000/ -(fifty thousand) to each of the workmen in addition to whatever amount has been paid to these workmen under Section 17(b) of the said Act by the appellant.
With this modification, this LPA is partly allowed to the extent as indicated above." ;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.