OCTAVIOUS STEEL AND CO LTD Vs. G C GOGOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 20th June, 1997 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Rule No. 3256/94, made thereby dismissing the petition with costs of Rs.5000/- payable to the legal representative of the deceased workman.

(2.) This litigation has a long pracrastinated chequered career. Almost 17 years have already lapsed since the industrial dispute of wrongful dismissal or otherwise of workman G.C.Gogi (since deceased) was referred to u/s 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act for adjudication as back as on 29.1.81, which was registered as Reference Case No. 3/81. By its award dated 9.1.84, the Labour Court directed reinstatement in service of the workman with full backwages which was the subject matter off challenge before this Court in Civil Rule No, 615/87 by the present appellant. Since the present appellant was not a party to the reference, the learned single Judge by his judgment and carder dated 7.9.92 set aside the award and remanded back the matter to the Labour Court, since the workman had died during pendency of the proceedings before the Labour Court. The learned Single Judge also observed mat the only question that survive for determination on payment was the payment of backwages to the legal representatives of the deceased workman. The parties were directed to appear before the Labour Court on 28.1.92 accordingly the parties appear and the Presiding Officer by his award dated 20th December, 1993 directed an amount of Rs. 1,45,014.72 Paise to be paid to the legal representative of the deceased by the present appellant M/s Octavius Steel & Co. Ltd. with interest @ 5% per annum with effect from 11.7.76,till its payment or realisation. This award was challenged in Civil Rule No. 2156/ 94 the learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment and order as already noted above, dismissed the writ petition. Hence this appeal.

(3.) Adverting to Section 33(C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the law provides that the question of payment must be decided by the Labour Court within 3 months. It is a sad commentray that what was to be decided within three months has taken a toll of alomost 17 years, that too, in face of the fact as noted by the learned single Judge in the impugned judgment :