Shanker Lal Sharma Vs. K.E.C. International Ltd. and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- k.s. rathore, j.1. brief facts of the case are that the government has made the following reference for adjudication: **d;k izcu/kd] ds-bz-lh-] t;iqj }kjk jfed jh 'kadjyky 'kekz a ftldk izfrfuf/kro v/;{k] ds-bz-lh- buvjus'kuy etnwj dkaxzsl] t;iqj bf.m;u dkwqh gkml ds mij] ,e-vkbz-jksm t;iqj us fd;k gsa dks lfkkbz jfed ?kksf'kr ugha fd;k tkuk ,oa lfkkbz jfed dks fn;s tkus okys lelr ns; ykhk ,oa lqfo/kkvksa ls oafpr j[kk tkuk u;k;ksfpr gs ,oa os/k gs;fn ugha rks jfed fdl jkgr ,oa jkf'k dks izkir djus dk vf/kdkjh gs2. the industrial tribunal vide its award dated 6.7.1999 decided the reference as under: not declaring shri shanker lal sharma workman as a permanent labour by manager, kec international jaipur is not legal and proper. shri shanker lal sharma is entitled to be declared permanent on the post of unskilled workman from the date of reference i.e., 23.1.91 and also is entitled to get all benefits and amenities from 23.1.91 which the other permanent employees are getting.3. the award dated 6.7.1999 was challenged by the appellant- petitioner before this court by way of filing sb civil writ petition no. 5623/99 titled as shanker lal sharma v. k.e.c. international ltd., jhotwara and anr. the writ petition was dismissed by the learned single judge vide its judgment dated 8.5.2002 observing that the reference was decided in favour of the petitioner as the award of reinstatement was passed in his favour but no consequential benefits was allowed since there was not prayer to this effect. 4. aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment dated 8.5.2002 passed by the learned single judge and award dated 6.7.1999, the appellant has preferred this special appeal. 5. the industrial tribunal declared the appellant permanent on the post of unskilled workman from the date of reference i.e., 23.1.1991 and the appellant was further held entitled to get all benefits and amenities from 23.1.1991 qua with other permanent employees are getting. with regard to quantifying the benefits and amenities, the industrial tribunal held that jurisdiction to quantify them under section 33(c)(2) lies with the labour court. 6. byway of this special appeal, the appellant prayed for the consequential benefits and amenities. for that purpose, the appellant ought to have file the application under section 33(c)(2) before the labour court. 7. the appellant also placed the letter dated 17.1.2006 issued by the labour department so far as the appellant is concerned whereby the deputy secretary, labour department has observed as under: **mijksdr fookn esa le>ksrk vf/kdkjh t;iqj ls izkir vlqy] okrkz izfrosnu esa mfyyf[kr rf;ksa ds vk/kkj ij fofnr gqvk gs fd jfed fnukad 17-9-77 ls fnukad 8-8-81 rd dh lsok dks je u;k;ky; }kjk iwoz esa gh yxkrkj ekuk tk pqdk gs blfy, bl ckcr iqu% fookn izsf'kr djus dk dksbz vksfpr; ugha gsa tgka rd cdk;k osru ,oa vu; lsok ykhk izkir djus dk iz'u gs] izkfkhz bugsa vks?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 dh /kkjk 33lh2 ;k osru hkqxrku vf/kfu;e ds rgr izkir dj ldrk gsa**8. upon perusal of the impugned judgment dated 8.5.2002, it appears that the learned single judge has not rightly appreciated the award passed by the industrial tribunal and the industrial tribunal has rightly observed that the appellant ought to have invoked the jurisdiction of the labour court for quantifying the benefits and amenities as granted in favour of other similarly situated employees. thus, the appellant is entitled to get the consequential benefits and amenities as indicated by the industrial tribunal upto the date of his fresh dismissal from service. consequently, the impugned judgment dated 8.5.2002 passed by the learned single judge is quashed and set aside. the writ petition stands allowed. the appellant can file application under section 33(c)(2) before the labour court for the purpose of quantifying the consequential benefits and amenities. 9. the management is expected to co-operate with the proceedings for early disposal of the application, failing which the labour court is at liberty to consider the statement of consequential benefits submitted by the appellant for the purpose of quantifying the consequential benefits and amenities. as the matter is pending since 20 years, the labour court is directed to decide the same expeditiously, but in any case not beyond the period of three months from the date of passing of this order. 10. the special appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations.