[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Employers In Relation To The Management ... vs Their Workmen Being Represented By The ... on 3 February, 2026

Author: Deepak Roshan

Bench: Deepak Roshan

                                                   2026:JHHC:2840

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        W.P.(L) No. 6447 of 2006
Employers in relation to the management of Kathara Colliery of M/s.
Central Coalfields Limited, At and PO Kathara, District-Bokaro, PIN-
829116, through Sri Abhaya Nand Pathak, son of Chandrama Mishra,
General Manager (Administration), resident of Jawahar Nagar, PO Ranchi
University, PS Gonda, District-Ranchi             ... ... Petitioner(s)

                                    Versus
Their Workmen being represented by the Area Secretary, Bihar Colliery
Kamgar Union, PO Kathara, District-Bokaro, PIN-829116
                                                ... ... Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioner(s)          : Mr. A. K. Mehta, Advocate
                                 Mr. Shubham Malviya, Advocate
                                 Mr. Praveen Tirkey, Advocate
For the Respondent(s)          : Mrs. M. M. Pal, Sr. Advocate
                                Miss Mohua Palit, Advocate
                                Miss Shipra Shalini, Advocate
                                 --------
                             JUDGMENT

CAV On 14/01/2026 Pronounced On 03/02/2026 The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing the Award dated 12.05.2006 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 39 of 1995 (Annexure-4), whereby the learned Tribunal has answered the Reference in favour of the respondent-Union, directing the Management to reinstate and regularize the concerned workmen as permanent employees of the Management of M/s Central Coalfields Limited.

2. The case of the sponsoring Union in crux is that the workmen named in the terms of reference have been working in Kathara colliery of M/s. CCL since 1984 with unblemished record of service. The concerned workmen have been performing permanent nature of job continuously such as erection of electrical pole/wire keeping pace with the production

2026:JHHC:2840

installation of Pump in the open cast mines, preparation of foundation and stone walls/fencing walls etc. under the direct control and supervision of the Management.

3. The further case of the workmen is that the Management with malafide intention to exploit and to deprive the workmen is paying them wages which is below the rates of NCWAs in the name of intermediaries.

4. Learned Tribunal after appreciating the evidences of the concerned workmen and the Management and also the written statement has come to the conclusion as under:

"9. If we apply the ratio of these cases as mentioned above, I find that the management has rather failed to prove that there was any contractor and under them the concerned persons have worked for a very short period and their work was not regular, rather temporary. On the other hand, the sponsoring union has brought on record to show that the concerned persons were working in Kathara Colliery for pretty long time regularly and doing miscellaneous jobs, like, erection of electrical pole/wire, fixing pole for overhead line and doing the electric wiring over the pole, installing cables, cutting foundation for installation of pump and erection of stone walls etc. Therefore, I find that the concerned persons are the employees of the principal employer who were doing miscellaneous jobs as mentioned above under the management under its supervision and control for pretty long time and their attendance in each calendar year has been remained to be more than 240 days. Therefore, the action of the management to stop work w.e.f. 17.3.2000 without complying of sec.25-F of the I.D.Act is illegal and void abinitio and they are entitled for reinstatement and regularisation in due course of time.

10. In the result, I render following award:

The demand of the union for regularisation by the principal employer of Kathara Colliery of M/S. C.C.Ltd. of Mahesh Mahato and 35 others whose names find place in the terms of reference are entitled for re-instatement into service and regularisation as the permanent employees of the management of M/S. C.C.Ltd in due course. The management is directed to regularise the concerned persons as Category-1 Mazdoor within 30 days from the date of publication of the award failing which they shall be entitled for wages of Category-I on expiry of 30 days from the date of publication of the award."

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner draws attention of the

Court towards the order dated 10.11.2023 passed by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 34031/2023, which

has relied the earlier order passed in Civil Appeal No. 1881 of 2011 and

submits that even assuming but not admitting, that the Award cannot be set

aside; even then, taking the claim of the workmen that they were working

2026:JHHC:2840

since 1984; now after four decades, most of them must have

superannuated and if at all, not superannuated; then at least they must be

on the verge of superannuation. As such, relying upon the order passed in

Civil Appeal No. 1881 of 2011, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has

granted lumpsum amount of Rs.50,000/- to each of the workmen along

with Rs.1,000/- per month as subsistence allowance from the date of

retrenchment till the date of superannuation; he fairly submits that since

the case is still pending and during the entire period of pendency of the

case, the Management is regularly paying the statutory wage as per

Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act to the respective workmen; as

such, the instant writ application can be disposed of without going into the

merits of the case by giving lumpsum amount to the respective workmen.

6. Learned senior counsel for the respondent-workmen submits

that there is no error in the Award and the concerned workmen are

employees of the principal employer and their attendance in each calendar

year has remained to be more than 240 days and the Tribunal has

categorically held the same in the Award.

7. She further submits that so far as payment of one-time

lumpsum amount is concerned; this Court may decide the amount and she

fairly admits that now out of 36 workmen 10 concerned workmen are

already dead, detail of which has been mentioned in supplementary

counter affidavit dated 30.10.2025 on behalf of the respondent. She further

submits that the Management has not paid the wages payable under

Section 17-B of the I.D. Act since January 2025.

2026:JHHC:2840

8. Thus, in crux, though learned senior counsel for the

respondent has supported the Award, however, she could not dispute the

factual scenario that many workmen have already died and if not, majority

must have crossed the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years, as such, she has

not opposed the idea of payment of one-time lumpsum amount. In essence,

she also admits the offer of settlement.

9. Having regard to the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the

opinion that interest of justice would be sufficed by respectfully accepting

the view of the Hon'ble Apex Court given in the case of Civil Appeal No.

1881 of 2011 (The Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors.)

disposed of on August 31, 2023, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court in

para-8.2 has held as under:

"8.2 Taking into account that only nominal lumpsum amount was ordered to be paid, instead of Rs.7,000/- (Rupees Seven Thousand Only), we deem it appropriate that a lumpsum amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) would be paid to each of the eligible retrenched workmen. They should also be paid monthly subsistence allowance of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) per month until they reach the age of 60 years i.e., the date of superannuation. The subsistence allowance is to be computed from the date of the Award i.e., 01.12.1998. The lumpsum amount will not carry any interest. In case of death of any workmen found eligible for relief under this order, the due amount should be remitted to the concerned legal heirs, after proper identification. It is ordered accordingly."

10. Accordingly, in this case also, this Court directs the

Management to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs.1.25 lakh to each of the

workmen. It goes without saying that so far as payment under Section 17-

B of the I.D Act, 1947 is concerned, if the same has not been paid till the

date of their retirement then the same shall be verified by the concerned

officer and if due to some reason or the other the amount under section 17-

2026:JHHC:2840

B has not been paid as required under the law, such amount shall be paid

to the workmen over and above the consolidated amount of Rs. 1.25 Lakhs.

11. Accordingly, the aforesaid amount shall be paid to the

respective workmen as early as possible, preferably within a period of 8

weeks.