Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 213 (MP)

Executive Engineer v. Bhagirath Prasad Jatav

2014-02-14

SUJOY PAUL

body2014
Judgment Sujoy Paul, J:- By filing this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners/department has assailed the order passed by the Labour Court dated 24.11.2010, Annexure P-2, which is affirmed in appeal by the Industrial Court on 14.11.2011. 2. The respondent/employee preferred an application under Section 31 (3) of the M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960 before the Labour Court. This case was registered as Case No.190/1997. The Labour Court decided this matter on 28.04.2000. This order of Labour Court will be referred hereinafter as order of main case. The Labour Court framed issue No.2 “whether the employee is entitled to get higher pay scale and benefit w.e.f. 29.12.1993. This issue No.2 was answered in favour of the employee by the Labour Court by holding that the employee is entitled to get posting on the post of Lab Attendant with the pay-scale of the said post. The main order of Labour Court was unsuccessfully tested by the employer by preferring an appeal under Section 65 of the M.P.I.R. Act before the Industrial Court. This appeal No. 378/MPIR/2000 was dismissed by 2 W.P. No. 5189/2012 the Industrial Court on 03.07.2002, Annexure P-5. The order of Labour Court and Industrial Court got stamp of approval from this Court on dismissal of Writ Petition No.615/2003 on 07.04.2004. In absence of any further challenge to these orders, the orders have attained finality. 3. The fruits of the said benefit and benefit of pay scale were not extended in favour of the employee. Then he filed an application under Section 108 of M.P.I.R. Act before the Labour Court for getting financial benefit arising out of the grant of pay scale. This case was registered as Case No.67/A/2009 M.P.I.R. (Misc). Before the Labour Court, the petitioner/department took a stand that there was no direction by the Court to regularize the employee and, therefore, he is not entitled for any benefit. The Labour Court by considering the earlier round of litigation and main order of the Labour Court which attained finality, opined that the employee is entitled to get the pay scale. The employee filed a calculation chart before the Labour Court to show the break up of the amount to be paid to him as per the main order of the Labour Court. The employee filed a calculation chart before the Labour Court to show the break up of the amount to be paid to him as per the main order of the Labour Court. Interestingly, the department witness, H.S. Sharma in his cross-examination admitted that the calculation sheet filed by the employee is actually prepared by the department and the employee is entitled to get the amount mentioned therein. The Labour Court for the reasons aforesaid opined that as per the earlier direction, the employee is entitled to get difference of pay which was calculated as Rs.3,71,027/-. Feeling aggrieved by this order of Labour Court, a Misc. Appeal under Section 67 of M.P.I.T. was filed before the Industrial Court which was registered as Misc. Application 3 W.P. No. 5189/2012 No.12/MPIR/2000. The Industrial Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that once main order has attained finality, the employer cannot escape from liability and is bound to pay the benefit of pay scale arising out of the main order. 4. These orders dated 24.11.2010 Annexure P-1 & P-2 are called in question by advancing singular contention that the employee was not entitled for grant of pay scale. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, this argument is not available to the department. Once main order of the Labour Court directing posting of the employee on the post of Lab Attendant with grant of pay scale attached to the post has attained finality, in execution proceedings the said objection cannot be entertained. I find no illegality in the impugned orders. The petitioner should not have filed this petition and should have obeyed the orders which have attained finality on dismissal of writ petition by this Court. The employer has unnecessarily dragged the low paid employee in the litigation and surprisingly filed this avoidable petition, therefore, I deem it proper to dismiss this petition with Rs.1,000/- as costs.