S. Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 29.09.2011 in M.J. Case No. 74 of 1999 whereby, the claim for payment of allowances except, the leave encashment has been declined, the son of the deceased workman has preferred W.P.(L) No. 5851 of 2013 and, M/s. TISCO Ltd. has challenged the order granting leave encashment to the deceased workman. W.P.(L) No. 5851 of 2013 The brief facts of the case are that, the deceased workman namely, Chakradhar Sah was employed initially with Indian Tube Limited and he was dismissed from service on 25.01.1979. An industrial dispute was raised which after failure of the conciliation proceeding, was referred for adjudication vide Reference Case No. 31 of 1979. The reference was answered vide award dated 30.05.1988 whereunder, the management of M/s. TISCO Ltd. was directed to reinstate the deceased workman with 75% back wages and other benefits. The petitioner is one of the legal heirs and successors of the deceased workman namely, Chakradhar Sah, who died during the pendency of M.J. Case No. 74 of 1999. An application under Sec. 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act was filed for payment of various benefits accruing to the deceased workman during the period his service remained terminated. The said application was partly allowed vide order dated 29.09.2011, against which the parties have filed writ petitions.
(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the tripartite agreement and the award dated 30.05.1988, the deceased workman was entitled for various allowances which were not paid to the deceased workman and therefore, the application under Sec. 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act was rightly entertained by the labour court. Challenging rejection of the claim for various allowances to the deceased workman, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the labour court ignored the award dated 30.05.1988 whereunder, the deceased workman was granted "other benefits" also, and thus committed serious error in law in not awarding "allowances" payable to the employees of M/s. TISCO Ltd. to the deceased workman also.;