Jharkhand High Court
Employers In Relation To The ... vs Their Workmen on 27 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Letters Patent Appellate Jurisdiction)
L.P.A No. 394 of 2010
--------
Employers in relation to the Management of Jarangdih Colliery of
Central Coalfields Limited, PO & PS-Jarangdih, District-Bokaro
having its registered office at Darbhanga House, Ranchi, District-
Ranchi. ... Appellant
Versus
Their Workmen, represented by Area Secretary, Bihar Colliery
Kamgar Union, Kathara Area, PO-Kathara, PS-Gomia, District-
Bokaro. .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
For the Appellant : Mr. A. K. Das, Advocate
Mr. Saurav Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mrs. M. M. Pal, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Mahua Palit, Advocate
--------
Order No.15/Dated: 27th July 2022
By an order dated 5th July 2022, Justice Sri Amitav
Kumar Gupta, a Former Judge of this Court, was appointed as
Mediator and to assist the learned Mediator during mediation
between the parties, Mr. Siddhartha Ranjan a practicing advocate
of this Court was appointed as AC to the learned Mediator.
2. The order dated 5th July 2022 is reproduced herein
below:
"The Central Coalfields Limited (in short, 'CCL')
challenged the Award dated 27th March 2001 in Reference
Case No. 96 of 1995.
2. By an order dated 22nd August 1995, the Central
Government made a reference in the following terms:
"Whether the demand of the Union for the regularization of
the services of S/Shri Laljee Saw and others (as per list
enclosed) by the management of Jarangdih Colliery of M/s
Central Coalfields Ltd is justified? If so, to what relief are
the concerned workmen entitled?"
3. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1 at
Dhanbad held that it was a sham contract in the garb of
which the concerned workmen were engaged by the
management of Jarangdih Colliery. The Tribunal, therefore,
held that the concerned workmen were entitled for
regularization.
4. The Award dated 27th March 2001 came to be
challenged by CCL in WP(L) No. 769 of 2002.
5. The writ Court did not find any perversity or illegality
in the Award made by the Tribunal and, accordingly,
dismissed the challenge laid by CCL to the award dated 27 th
March 2001.
6. WP(L) No. 769 of 2002 was filed on 25th January 2002
and the matter was heard on as many as eleven occasions
and by judgment dated13 th November 2009 the writ
petition was dismissed.
7. In the aforesaid nine years no order under section
17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was passed
because the operation of the Award was not stayed by the
writ Court. We further find that there is no order by this
Court in the present proceeding staying operation of the
Award dated 27th March 2001. We are informed that no
application under section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947 was filed by the concerned workmen and no
proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been
taken out by them before this Court.
8. Notwithstanding the above, the employer has not
implemented the Award dated 27th March 2001.
9. Mrs. M.M. Pal, the learned senior counsel appearing
for the concerned workmen, states that negotiations were
held with CCL for payment of compensation in lieu of back
wages and for regularizing the concerned workmen in
service, however, such negotiations did not succeed as CCL
refused to pay compensation to the tune of 50% of back
wages.
10. At this stage, we are not inclined to make any
comment upon the conduct of CCL in not implementing the
Award dated 27th March 2001 but one thing is clear that
prejudice has already been caused to the concerned
workmen by efflux of time. Section 89 of the Code of Civil
Procedure provides that where it appears to the Court that
there exists elements of a settlement which may be
acceptable to the parties the Court shall formulate the terms
of settlement and give them to the parties for their
observations and, thereafter, may refer the matter for
arbitration, conciliation, judicial settlement including
settlement through Lok Adalat or mediation. The mandate
under section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable
to all Courts including the High Court. In our opinion, every
case wherever there appears a possibility of the settlement,
it is the bounded duty of the Court to make an attempt for
settlement of the dispute between the parties.
11. Having gone through the entire records of the case,
we are of the opinion that the dispute between the parties
may be referred for settlement through mediation.
12. With consent of the parties, Justice Sri Amitav Kumar
Gupta, a Former Judge of this Court is appointed as
Mediator.
13. To assist the learned Mediator during mediation
between the parties, Mr. Siddhartha Ranjan, a practicing
advocate of this Court, is appointed as AC to the learned
Mediator.
14. It is expected that the mediation exercise is concluded
within next three months and a report is transmitted to this
Court on or before 14th October 2022.
15. The learned Mediator shall be paid Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh Only) for each sitting and Mr. Siddhartha
Ranjan, the learned AC to the learned Mediator shall be paid
Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand Only) for each
sitting. In the circumstances noticed above, we direct that
payment to the learned Mediator and the learned AC to the
learned Mediator shall be made by CCL.
16. Mr. A.K. Das, the learned counsel for CCL, informs the
Court that there is sufficient infrastructural facility including
conference room available with CCL which shall be provided
to the learned Mediator for conducting mediation sittings.
17. We further order that CCL shall provide secretarial
assistance to the learned Mediator whenever he holds
mediation sittings.
18. We expect that the parties shall explore the possibility
of settlement and would not adopt a rigid approach.
19. The Registry shall provide copy of the entire writ
Court's record to the learned Mediator and the learned AC to
the learned Mediator.
20. The learned AC to the learned Mediator may approach
this Court for any clarification or difficulty faced by the
learned Mediator.
21. Post this matter on 18th October 2022 under the
heading "For Orders".
22. Let copy of this order be delivered to Justice Sri
Amitav Kumar Gupta, the learned Mediator; Mr. Siddhartha
Ranjan, the learned AC to the learned Mediator, and; the
learned counsel for the parties."
3. A communication has been received from Justice Sri
Amitav Kumar Gupta expressing his inability to conduct mediation
as he was a member of the Bench which passed the order for
restoration of L.P.A No. 394 of 2010.
4. This Letters Patent Appeal has come up on Board due to
the aforesaid communication by Justice Sri Amitav Kumar Gupta.
5. We are therefore required to make another arrangement
in place of Justice Sri Amitav Kumar Gupta. Our attention
has been drawn to the nature of dispute between the parties -
award has been made for regularization of 90 workmen - and,
keeping the enormity of work in mind, we constitute a team of
Mediators to be headed by Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Former Chief
Secretary, Government of Jharkhand (Mobile No.9431107411) and
Md. Ashraf Hussain Ansari, a retired District Judge, (Mobile
No.9122759292) and Mr. Siddhartha Ranjan, a practicing advocate
(Mobile No.9234760469) as the member Mediators to conduct
conciliation and mediation sessions between the parties so as to
make them agree for an amicable settlement of the dispute.
6. The learned Mediators shall be paid Rs. 20,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Thousand) each for each sitting - 1 st sitting shall
be held on 13th August 2022.
7. All infrastructural and secretarial facilities shall be
provided by CCL as indicated in the order dated 5 th July 2022. It is
further indicated that the conciliation and mediation sessions shall
be conducted in absence of the lawyers of the parties.
8. The Registry shall provide complete set of paper-book
and the entire writ Court's record to Md. Ashraf Hussain Ansari
and Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, the learned Mediators.
9. Post this matter on 18th October 2022 as ordered by this
Court vide order dated 5th July 2022.
10. Let a copy of this order be delivered to Md. Ashraf
Hussain Ansari, retired District Judge, Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh,
Former Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Mr. Siddhartha
Ranjan, the learned practicing advocate and the learned counsel
for the parties.
(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)
(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)
Amit/
