Rajiv Narain Raina, J. - (1.) In the first round of litigation against the termination order on a reference made to the Labour Court, the petitioner-workman was awarded reinstatement by setting aside the illegal termination. However, back wages were not awarded to him.
(2.) Feeling aggrieved by the denial of consequential benefits upon reinstatement the petitioner approached this Court in CWP No.7154 of 1987 which was partially allowed on April 07, 1989 and the petitioner-workman was granted liberty to approach the Labour Court under section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to claim back wages. This Court in its order dated April 07, 1989 in the above cited petition left it open to the Labour Court to adjudicate the dispute as to whether the petitioner had or had not resumed duty for him to claim back wages. If such a dispute was raised by the workman it was open to be decided in proceedings under section 33 of the ID Act. That is how the workman approached the Labour Court once again to compute money due in an application presented under section 33-C (2) of the ID Act claiming back wages for the disputed period. The claim application succeeded before the Labour Court.
(3.) Aggrieved by the order of the Labour Court, the management preferred CWP No.4906 of 1991 which was dismissed on January 30, 2003.;