Union Of India Thru The General ... vs Satya Narain & Another
2012 Latest Caselaw 3492 ALL

Citation : 2012 Latest Caselaw 3492 ALL
Judgement Date : 13 August, 2012

Allahabad High Court

Union Of India Thru The General ... vs Satya Narain & Another on 13 August, 2012

Bench: Ajai Lamba




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 26
 

 
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 4346 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Union Of India Thru The General Manager (P) N.R. & Others
 
Respondent :- Satya Narain & Another
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Chandra Shekhar Sinha
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.

1. It has been contended that under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, ten times penalty could have been imposed. The order/award passed by respondent no.2 is beyond jurisdiction. Learned counsel has referred to the findings recorded by the appellate forum in Annexure-10 to say that the award passed by respondent no.2 has been upheld for the wrong reasons.

2. I have considered contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. Appellate forum has taken into account the fact that respondent no.1-workman filed the claim in the year 1992. The claim was to be dealt with and disposed of within three months, which was not done. The order was passed for paying the workman Rs.10,168/-. However, in the year 1997, an appeal was filed beyond limitation.

4. Be that as it may, in view of the slow process it has taken twenty years for the procedures to culminate in the order passed by the appellate forum. In this view of the exceptional circumstances, an award of Rs.1,57,360.50 has been upheld.

5. In substance and in the interest of substantial justice, as also equity, I find that a poor workman, who has served the petitioners, has been able to get claim after twenty years. At this stage, Northern Railway, has approached this court on a technicality, without taking into account various other factors, including predicament of poor workman, who does not have the assistance of good professionals.

6. Prima facie, I am of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the appellate forum indicates exceptional/equitable and substantial reasons for grant of release of payment to a workman. The impugned orders or this order may not be considered as legal precedents on the issue, but surely, considering the meagre awarded amount and exceptional circumstances, noted above, the amount awarded needs to be paid to the workman.

7. At this stage, learned counsel prays for time to take instructions.

8. List on 27.8.2012

Order Date :- 13.8.2012

A.Nigam