Gauhati High Court
Sushma Rawat vs The Union Of India And 2 Ors on 18 July, 2022
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010132132022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./650/2022
SUSHMA RAWAT
D/O LATE MADAN SINGH RAWAT
R/O CINNAMARA COMPLEX, ONGC, JORHAT.
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS
REP. BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT,
GOVT. OF INDIA, SHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN, RAFIMARG, NEW DELHI-
110001.
2:THE CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL)
5
SHAM NATH MARG
PREMA KUNJ
CIVIL LINES
NEW DELHI- 110054.
3:THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL)
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
GOVT. OF INDIA
GUWAHATI
ZOO NARENGI TINIALI
SAPTARSHI PATH
GUWAHATI - 781024
Advocate for the Petitioner : S N SARMA
Page No.# 2/5
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
18.07.2022
Heard Mr. S.N. Sarma, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. N.K. Devi,
learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned CGC
appearing for all the respondents.
2. By this application under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has
assailed the legality of the order dated 22.04.2019 and 31.05.2019 as well as
the proceedings of CR. Case No.4402C/2009, pending in the Court of learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup Metro, Guwahati.
3. The case projected by the petitioner is that initially in respect of 264
workmen engaged in Dhansiri Valley Project, Eastern Regional Business Centre,
Jorhat by the ONGC on the basis of an industrial dispute bearing Reference Case
No.1(c)/1989.
4. Subsequently, 37 workmen once again preferred a labour dispute in
respect of which Reference Case No.1(C)/1989 was registered which was
followed by an award for regularization of their services. Omitting the series of
allegations which followed by virtue of award dated 12.03.1991 in Reference
Case No.1(C) of 1989, it would suffice to mention that this Court by judgment
Page No.# 3/5
dated 29.09.2016 passed in WA 96/2013, remanded the matter for fresh
adjudication before the CGIT and it was provided that till the matter was re-
decided, interim order dated 04.06.2013 would continue to operate. Thereafter,
the award dated 13.09.2019 was passed in Reference Case No.8/2017 [formerly
Reference Case.1(C)/1997], whereby, referring to the names of only 23
workmen at para-12 of the said award, the learned CGIT held that the action of
the management in not regularizing the service of the present set of workers
i.e. 23 workers was not illegal or unjustified. However, they were allowed to be
retained in service till their respective age of superannuation.
5. Accordingly, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the said award has been fully implemented and therefore, there
is no question for non-enforcement of the said award.
6. It is projected that on an earlier occasion when notices were issued to
one Firoze Dotiwala, the then Assam Basin Manager, who on receipt of
summons had approached this Court by filing Crl. Pet.340/2020 for quashing of
the complaint petition and this Court by order dated 24.06.2020 stayed the
further proceedings of Complaint case No.4402C/2009 against the said
petitioner.
7. The present petitioner has annexed at page-162, the summons
received from the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M),
Guwahati which was served through the Officer-in-Charge of Jorhat Police
Station, which was issued for personal appearance of the Assam Basin Manager,
Page No.# 4/5
Assam Arakan Basin, Oil and Natural Gas Commission, Luit Bhawan, Cinamara
Complex, P.O. Chinnamara, District-Jorhat, Assam. Accordingly, the learned
counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present petitioner is the
current Assam Basin Manager and is being compelled to receive the said
summons as an accused. It is further submitted that there is nothing on record
to show that the complaint was filed by the appropriate authority on the
sanction appropriate Government and it is submitted that under section 34 of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 cognizance of offence could not have been
taken against the present petitioner.
8. Per contra, the learned CGC has vehemently opposed the issuance of
notice in the present criminal petition and has submitted that the order by which
cognizance of offence was taken is not under challenge and therefore, mere
issuance of summons on the petitioner would not call for interference with the
orders dated 22.04.2019 and 31.05.2019 passed by the learned trial Court in
the case of CR case no.4402C/2009 nor any case is made out for quashing of
the said contempt petition. It is also further submitted that as the petitioner is
not the main accused but is appearing in the official capacity, there would be no
impediment for the petitioner to appear before the trial Court.
9. Issue notice returnable on 22.08.2022.
10. As all the respondents are duly represented, requisite extra copies of
the writ petition be served on the learned CGC.
Page No.# 5/5
11. Having regard to the fact that by order dated 24.06.2020, the
proceedings of CR case no.4402C/2009 was stayed in respect of Firoze Dotiwala
and from the contents of the present complaint petition, which is annexed as
Annexure-13 of this application, it is seen that the accused named herein is
different from the present petitioner and the substituted accused no.2, if so
done, and that the proceedings is already been stayed against accused no.2 as
indicated above, as an interim measure the Court is inclined to provide that the
further proceeding in CR case No.4402 C/2009, in respect of the present
petitioner, namely, Sushma Rawat shall also be stayed.
12. The Registry shall call for the scanned copy of the entire order-sheets
in CR case No.4402C/2009 from the court of learned CJM, Kamrup Metro,
Guwahati. The requisition may be sent by e-mail with liberty to the said learned
Court to send the scanned copy of order-sheet by e-mail to the Court.
13. List the matter on 22.08.2022.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
