- (1.) THE workman moved an application under section 33-C (2) of the U. P. Industrial Disputes act for computation of certain benefits, namely, arrears of pay pursuant to the recommendation of the V Pay Commission. During the pendency of the proceedings before the Labour Court, the petitioner, who is the U. P. State Road Transport corporation, implemented the recommendation and paid the arrears to the workmen. The Labour Court, while recording the payment of arrears, imposed a cost of Rs. 300/- and also directed the petitioner to pay interest on delayed payment. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the order passed by the labour Court, has filed the present writ petition.
(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the claim of the workman could not be adjudicated under Section 33-C (2) of the act by the Labour Court since there was no previous adjudication on this issue and consequently the entire proceedings under section 33-C (2) of the Act was ex facie, illegal and without jurisdiction.
(3.) IN support of his submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner h'as placed reliance upon a decision of the Supreme Court in State of u. P. and Another v. Brijpal Singh 2005-III-LLJ-1003 (SC) in which, it was held that one of the precondition for filing a claim under Section 33-C (2) of the U. P. Industrial disputes Act was, that the benefit which was sought to be executed under Section 33-C (2) of the Act must be an existing right which had already been adjudicated upon.;