Kerala High Court
Badagara Sahakaran Asupathri vs Labour Court on 11 April, 2024
Author: Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
Thursday, the 11th day of April 2024 / 22nd Chaithra, 1946
WA NO. 1949 OF 2022
AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 20.9.2022 IN WP(C) 29536/2022 OF THIS COURT
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN W.P.(C):
1. BADAGARA SAHAKARAN ASUPATHRI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
VADAKARA.P.O., KOZHIKODE., PIN - 673101
2. PRESIDENT, BADAKARA SAHAKARAN ASUPATHRI, VADAKARA.P.O., KOZHIKODE.,
PIN - 673101
BY ADVS.N.RAGHURAJ, SAYUJYA & VIVEK MENON
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN W.P.(C):
1. LABOUR COURT, KOZHIKODE, CIVIL STATION POST, KOZHOKODE DISTRICT.,
PIN - 673020
2. SHAJI.K.K,AGED 48 YEARS, S/O DAMU, THEKKEPULIYULLAKANDIYIL, NUT
STREET, VADAKARA.P.O., KOZHIKODE., PIN - 673101
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1
ADVS. S.VINOD BHAT, ANAGHA LAKSHMY RAMAN & GREESHMA CHANDRIKA R. FOR R2
Prayer for interim relief in the Writ Appeal stating that in the
circumstances stated in the appeal memorandum, the High Court be pleased
to stay the operation and implementation of the Award dated 08.04.2022 in
I.D.No.15 of 2022 of the 1st respondent court marked as Ext.P7 in
W.P.(C)No.29536 of 2022, pending disposal of the Writ Appeal.
This writ appeal again coming on for orders on 11.4.2024 upon
perusing the appeal memorandum and this court's order dated 20.12.2022,
court on the same day passed the following:
EXT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.D.NO.15 OF 2020 PASSED BY THE
IST RESPONDENT DATED 08.04.2022
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V & P.M.MANOJ, JJ.
-------------------------------------------
W.A. No.1949 of 2022
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of April 2024
ORDER
Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.
I.A.No. 1 of 2024
This application is filed under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, seeking issuance of directions to the employer, the petitioner in the writ petition, to pay the full wages last drawn by him. It is stated in the affidavit that the applicant is not in employment ever since the termination of office by the respondent and he has not acquired any alternate employment. He has stated in the application that the last drawn wages are Rs. 29,600/- per mensem.
2. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent. It is contended that the applicant does not have a consistent case of the last drawn salary. In the claim statement, it was stated that the last drawn wage was Rs. 28,000/- per mensem whereas during cross-examination, he had stated that his last drawn wage was Rs. 19,218/-. It is further stated that the applicant is a contractor by profession and he has a monetary interest in the hotel business. It is also stated that the applicant is a well-known real estate agent in the Vadakara area and he has been earning huge amounts by way of commission.
3. In response, a reply affidavit has been filed appending a copy of the order passed by the Labour Court, Kozhikode in CP No.29/2022. The said 2 W.A. No.1949 of 2022 order was passed after hearing both sides. In the said order, one-half of the basic wages last drawn by the applicant is shown as Rs. 14,800/-. The respondent had not even appeared before the Labour Court and the said order which is dated 15.10.2022 has not been challenged.
4. Though it is stated in the counter affidavit that the applicant is employed elsewhere, no materials have been placed before this Court to substantiate the said contention.
5. Under Section 17B of the Act, when a Labour Court or Tribunal by its award, directs reinstatement of any workman and the employer prefers any proceedings against such award before the High Court or the Supreme Court, the employer shall be liable to pay such workman, during the pendency of such proceedings, full wages last drawn by him inclusive of any maintenance allowance admissible to him under any rule, if the workman had not been employed in any establishment during such period and an affidavit by any such workman has been filed to that effect. However, the workman may not be entitled to any relief if the employer is able to prove to the satisfaction of the court that such workman had been employed and had been receiving adequate remuneration during any period or part thereof. In the case on hand, the employer has not been able to prove to the satisfaction of this Court that the worker is employed elsewhere and has been drawing adequate remuneration. From the order passed in the claim petition, it is clear that the last drawn wage of the petitioner can only be Rs. 29,600/-.
3W.A. No.1949 of 2022
In that view of the matter, this application will stand allowed. There will be a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to forthwith pay to the applicant the last drawn wage on and from 12.8.2022, the date of filing of the writ petition challenging the judgment passed by the Labour Court. W.A. No.1949 of 2022
The interim order is extended by two months.
Post on 23.5.2024.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE Sd/-
P.M.MANOJ
JUDGE
ncd
11-04-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar