Amitava Lala, J. - (1.) This writ petition is made by the petitioner company challenging the order no. 13 dated 11th April, 1994 passed by the First Labour Court of West Bengal under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 being case No. Comp. 86/92.
(2.) Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 says as follows : "(2) Where any workman is entitled to receive from the employer any money or any benefit which is capable of being computed in terms of money and if any question arises as to the amount of money due or as to the amount at which such benefit should be computed, then the question may, subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, be decided by such Labour Court as may be specified in this behalf by the appropriate Government (within a period not exceeding three months) (provided that where the Presiding Officer of a Labour Court considers it necessary or expedient so to do, he may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, extend such period by such further period as he may think fit)". From the plain reading of such sub Section under Section 33C it appears to this Court that unless and until one has proved to be the workman under the proved employer computation right of payment cannot said to be arisen, therefore, it is far to say that question of computation and recovery will arise.
(3.) It appears to this Court that an application was made by the respondent workman in the Labour Court on 25th September, 1992 to have the order under such section. Written objection was filed by petitioner company before such Court taking the plea amongst others that there is no relationship of master and servant in between the petitioner and the respondent workman. In further, an application was filed by the petitioner which was verified on 7th January, 1993 saying that the application of the workman/respondent under Section 33C(2) as above is whole misconceived because the applicant has initiated a conciliation proceeding before the conciliation officer regarding his termination. Therefore, unless and until it is decided by the Tribunal or Labour Court as to whether there is master-servant relation-ship between the parties Or not the question of payment of money under such Section cannot be entertained. Hence, such issue being the preliminary issue will be taken up before the determination of the question in merit. The workman took the view, by opposing such prayer, that although it is true to say that he raised a dispute before the Labour Commissioner in the form of a conciliation which is pending but that is in respect of the separate issue i.e. for wrongful termination of service. It has got nothing to do in respect of the computation of money receivable from the employer by such workmen.;