Employer In Relation To The ... vs Their Workman Represented ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4149 Jhar

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       (Civil Writ Jurisdiction)
                      W.P.(L) No. 3567 of 2021
                              ........

Employer in relation to the Management of South Tisra Colliery of M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited .... ..... Petitioner Versus Their Workman represented through Koyla Ispat Mazdoor Panchayat, Dhanbad .... ..... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO ............

For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Das, Advocate : Mr. Sahay Gaurav Piyush, Advocate.

For the Respondent :

........

06/02.11.2021.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has preferred this writ petition against the award dated 30.01.2020 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, No.1, Dhanbad in Reference No.30/2015.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that by Order No.L-20012/55/2015-(IR(CM-1) dated 10/07/2015 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management of South Tisra Colliery of M/s BCCL in not giving proper promotion after implementation of award of Ref. No.201/2001 to Shri Khagan Rajwar, Pers. No. 00833690, EP Fitter of South Tisra Colliery of M/s BCCL is fair and justified? To what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?"

Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred para-13 of the impugned award, wherein comparative chart with regard to appointment and promotion of Khagan Rajwar, respondent and Binod Prasad Rajak another workman has been dealt with by the learned Tribunal. It appears that though Khagan Rajwar has joined on 04.09.1986 whereas Binod Prasad Rajak has joined on 06.12.1986 on the initial post of Greaser Helper (T) in category-I. Subsequently Khagan Rajwar was promoted on 23.09.1987 on category-II and then Binod Prasad Rajak was promoted

subsequently on 07.12.1987, but at the post of Auto-Fitter(H) the Binod Prasad Rajak was promoted earlier on 06.02.1989 whereas Khagan Rajwar was promoted on 21.11.1990. This order of the year 1989 has never been challenged by Khagan Rajwar prior to the reference made in the year 2015, as such, in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of U.P. Jal Nigam and Another Vs. Jaswant Singh and Another reported in (2006) 11 SCC 464, (Paras-16&17), in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Chaman Rana, reported in (2018) 5 SCC 798 and in the case of Indian Council of Agricultural Research & Another Vs. T. K. Suryanarayan and Others, reported in (1997) 6 SCC 766, the workman has no right to agitate the same after such a long delay, as such, notice may be issued to the respondent.

Under the aforesaid circumstances, let notice be issued upon the respondent under both process i.e. under registered cover with A/D as well as under ordinary process, for which requisite etc. must be filed by tomorrow i.e. 03.11.2021.

Put up this case after service of notice.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Jay/-