Rajya Parivahan Karmachari ... vs M.P.R.T. Corporation
2022 Latest Caselaw 6164 MP

                                                                    1
                                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                           AT INDORE
                                                                  BEFORE
                                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
                                                           ON THE 26th OF APRIL, 2022

                                                    WRIT PETITION No. 23731 of 2021

                                        Between:-
                                        RAJYA PARIVAHAN KARMACHARI MAHASANGH
                                        C/O JITENDRA KUMAR GOTHARWAL PRANTIYA
                                        MAHAMANTRI MAHARANI LAXMIBAI MARG-2
                                        UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                  .....PETITIONER
                                        (BY SHRI JAGDISH BAHETI, ADVOCATE)

                                        AND

                                1.      M.P.R.T. CORPORATION MANAGING DIRECTOR
                                        HEAD OFFICE HABIBGANJ BHOPAL M.P (MADHYA
                                        PRADESH)

                                2.      REGIONAL TRANSPORT/ GENERAL MANAGER
                                        M.P.R.T.C. PRESENT ADDRESS PALDA MAIN RD,
                                        DINESH NAGAR PALDA INDORE OLD ADDRESS
                                        RTO OFFICE NAYTA MUNDLA INDORE (MADHYA
                                        PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
                                        (BY MS. KIRTI PATWARDHAN, ADVOCATE)

                                      T h is petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the

                                following:
                                                                     ORDER

Heard finally with consent.

By this petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.09.2021 passed by the Court below whereby the execution proceedings preferred at the instance of the petitioner have been dismissed.

02. The facts of the case reveal that petitioner Rajya Parivahan Karmachari Mahasangh which is a workmen union filed original application before the labour Court seeking relief for payment of Fifth Pay Commission. The application was allowed by the labour Court by award dated 25.02.2013/01.04.2013 directing the respondents to release the benefit of Fifth Pay Commission of the workmen. Signature Not Verified SAN

03. Being aggrieved by the said award, the respondent preferred W.P. Digitally signed by JYOTI CHOURASIA

No.8822 of 2013 before this Court in which by order dated 09.03.2017 the award Date: 2022.04.27 15:10:25 IST

passed by the Labour Court was modified and following directions were issued:

Resultantly, the respondents shall recalculate the VRS amount by taking into account the pay-scale of old 4th central pay commission and the dearness allowance which was given to the employees of State Government

at the time VRS was granted to the employees by the corporation.

The exercise of recalculating the amount and making the payment of the amount in terms of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to each and every individual through bank account be concluded within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Respondents have also paid the gratuity to the employees of the corporation by taking into account the pay which was given at the time they were granted VRS, meaning thereby, the dearness allowance, which was being paid by the State Government (pay scale of 4 th pay commission) was not taken into account while granting gratuity. Respondents shall also recalculate the gratuity in respect of employees, who have not been granted the pay-scale keeping in view the old 4th pay commission and at the relevant point of time, the dearness allowance, which was applicable to the employees of State Government, who were getting old pay scale, the exercise of calculating the gratuity amount and payment be also done within 4 months and the amount be deposited in the bank accounts of the employees.

Shri Moyal has fairly stated before this Court that the matter has attained finality in light of the judgment delivered by the Apex Court.

The petition stands allowed. The award stands modified to the extent as aforesaid. The employees shall be entitled for the similar benefit which has been extended to identically placed person by the Hon'ble supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.321/2013.

04. In the meanwhile, the petitioner has filed execution proceedings before the labour Court which were transferred before the Court below by order dated 15.07.2013. Upon modification of the award by this Court as aforesaid, the petitioner prayed before the Court below for re-calculation of the amount to which the members of petitioner workmen union are entitled. A calculation was also

Signature Not Verified submitted before the Court below. The same was objected to by respondents by SAN

Digitally signed by JYOTI filing their reply.

CHOURASIA Date: 2022.04.27 15:10:25 IST

05. By the impugned order the Court below has closed the execution proceedings by observing that there is no order passed by this Court to it for calculation of the amount payable to the members of the petitioner's union. No amount has been fixed by this Court and instead the responsibility for making the calculation has been fixed upon the respondents themselves. It was further observed that the petitioner, only for the purpose of said calculation would be having the liberty to approach the Competent Court including the labour Court.

06. A perusal of the award passed by the labour Court, as modified by this Court leaves no rooms for doubt that it is only entitlement of the petitioner which

had been adjudicated upon. In the order of this Court direction was issued for conducting the exercise of calculation of the amount and making payment to each and every individual of the petitioner union.

07. Though the respondents were directed to re-calculate the said amount but admittedly they have not done so. Only for that reason and for failure on their part to calculate the said amount, it could not be held that the Executing Court was not under any obligation to make the said calculation. The petitioner had submitted before the Executing Court the details of the amount to which its members in each case was entitled. If the direction contained in the order of this Court was not complied with by the respondents then the only remedy available to the petitioner was to move the Executing Court.

08. Since Execution proceedings were already pending before the Executing Court at the time of passing of the order by this Court, in my opinion, upon failure of respondents to calculate the amount as was directed therein, the Executing Court assumed full jurisdiction for calculating the amount payable. However by declining to do so, it has failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it.

09. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the Executing Court is set aside and it is directed to proceed further with the execution proceedings in light of the observations made herein above and in accordance with law.

Signature Not Verified SAN

10. The entire exercise for calculation and payment of amount to the

Digitally signed by JYOTI CHOURASIA petitioner completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of Date: 2022.04.27 15:10:25 IST

certified copy of this order.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE jyoti

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by JYOTI CHOURASIA Date: 2022.04.27 15:10:25 IST