- (1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for the following reliefs: -i) For issuance of an appropriate writ /order/direction from this Honble court for quashing the Award dated 17.7.2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hazaribagh in M.J. Case No. 4 of 1999 whereby and whereunder the learned Presiding Officer has been pleased to hold that the applicants (Respondent Nos. 2 to 34 herein) are entitled for computation of the benefit of the Adhoc Cash Award Scheme for the year 1998 -99 and directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.2,52,377.15 paise (Rupees two lakh fifty two thousand three hundred seventy seven and paise fifteen) only alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the case, ii)For a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon the concerned respondents to forbear from giving effect to or acting pursuant to or in furtherance of the said impugned Award dated 17.7.2002.
(2.) THE main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is as to whether the Labour Court in a proceeding u/s 33 -C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act can decide the issue involving disputed question of fact and monetary benefit. He has also submitted that the scheme for the period 1998 -99 was not applicable to the respondent workmen since they were admittedly contingent employees and thus they cannot claim the benefit under the said scheme. The facts in brief are set out as under: - An Adhoc Cash Award Scheme was introduced for drilling operation in the year 1994 based on productivity and the cash award was payable accordingly to all the persons working in the drilling project during the period 1994 -95. This scheme was initially for a period of one year; but the same was extended from time to time. However, since 1997 -98 the Cash Award Scheme was made applicable only to all the persons at the drilling project excluding trainees and jobs done through contract. The relevant clause is quoted as under. Clause 2.01. The Scheme shall be applicable to all persons at the Projects, excluding the trainees and jobs done through contracts. However, distribution of the total Cash Award earning between different employees has to be based on the following criteria: -
(3.) RESPONDENT Nos. 2 to 34 filed an application before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, stating that they were covered under the Adhoc Cash Award Scheme for drilling operation 1998 -99 and were denied the payment of cash award on the ground that they were contingent employees.;