- (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The instant writ application is directed against the judgment dated 23.3.2006 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi in M.J. Case No. 5 of 2004 whereby the application of respondent No. 2 and 3 have been allowed by directing the petitioner to make payment of Rs. 2,22,378/(which includes Leave Encashment & bonus) to each of them.
(3.) It is submitted by learned Counsel for petitioner- employer, Central Roller Flour Mills(Pvt.) Ltd, Ranchi that it is admitted case that after 14 years the workmen filed this case Under Section 32(C)2 of the Industrial Dispute Act claiming back wages from 1990 to 2004 and as such the claim itself was stale. He has further submitted that finding of the Labour court is perverse in view of the evidence of the respondent No. 2, who admitted that since last seven years he is residing at Chapra and doing agricultural work at home and he has filed this case after seven years and as such it is absolutely clear that he was gainfully employed since last seven years. Learned Counsel has relied upon the judgment reported in the case of North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation v. M. Nagangounda, 2007 10 SCC 765. He has further submitted that the finding of the labour court is perverse in view of the fact that respondent No. 3, Manager Rai himsel admitted in his evidence that he is now aged about 60 years and also admitted in para 4 that age of retirement is 55 years and now admitted that he was not working for the last 14 years. The management gave evidence that he was plying taxi at Kolkata. Hence, the finding arrived at by the Labour court is wholly illegal,perverse and only fit to be quashed.;