- (1.) SEEKING quashing of order dated 02.07.2011 in M.J. Case No. 30 of 2009, the petitionerBCCL has filed the present writ petition.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that, the respondent's husband namely, Kanhai Ram was working as Helper of Bucket Man in B.B. Camp Ropeway Bhulan,Bhulan Bararee under Bharat Coking Coal Limited. The deceased employee was allotted Coal Mines Provident Fund No. C/417 41. He nominated his wife, the respondent herein as his nominee. The husband of the respondent died on 16.01.1995 while in service and therefore, claiming monetary compensation in terms of NCWAV she made representation to the management of BCCL. At the time of death of the husband of the respondent, the monetary compensation of NCWAV was Rs. 2,000/ per month. On an application filed under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, a case being M.J. Case No. 30 of 2009 was initiated in which the petitionerBCCL filed its written statement stating that she has never made application for grant of monetary compensation and therefore, the M.J. Case No. 30 of 2009 was liable to be dismissed. It is further stated that in response to representation dated 24.08.2000 of the respondent, the management sent its reply dated 14.09.2000 stating that all care would be taken for providing employment to the genuine person. Applications dated 12.07.1999, 17.07.1999, 29.10.1999, 24.08.2000 and 14.08.2006 were marked as exhibits. The learned Trial Court upon consideration of the materials adduced by the parties found that the respondent was entitled for monetary compensation for 10 years w.e.f. 16.01.1995.
(3.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the jurisdiction under 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act is in the nature of execution and since there was no award in favour of the respondent, application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot be allowed. It is further submitted that for invoking jurisdiction under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, there must exist a preexisting right which in the present case does not exist and therefore award dated 02.07.2011 is bad in law.;