M/S. Veljan Hydrair Ltd., vs The Honble Industrial Tribunali,
2022 Latest Caselaw 942 Tel

                                      1



      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                AND
          THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                       WRIT APPEAL No.489 of 2009

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)

01.          This Writ Appeal is filed aggrieved by the order

dated 06.06.2007 passed in W.P.No.20724 of 1998 by the

learned Single Judge.

02.          Heard Sri V.Hari Haran, learned Senior counsel

appearing for the appellant, learned Government Pleader for

Labour for respondents 1 and 3 and Sri N.Saida Rao, learned

counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.

03. It has been contended by the appellant that the

2nd respondent Union has raised a dispute demanding

cancellation of transfer orders in respect of some of its

employees before the Conciliation Officer and when the

conciliation talks failed, the Conciliation Officer has

submitted a failure report to the Government and the

Government has referred the dispute to the Industrial

Tribunal-I at Hyderabad, so as to examine whether the 2nd

respondent Union in demanding cancellation of transfer

orders of its members is valid or not. The reference made

by the Government was numbered as I.D.No.9 of 1997

before the Industrial Tribunal-I at Hyderabad.

04. Learned counsel for the appellant had contended that

the Industrial Tribunal had erroneously passed an Award in

favour of the 2nd respondent vide order dated 27.04.1998

without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the

appellant.

05. Learned counsel for the appellant had further

contended that in respect of other members of 2nd

respondent Union, the cause did not survive and only in

respect of Sivarama Krishna, he has contended that the

Industrial Tribunal ought not to have interfered in the

transfer order of Sivarama Krishna and the Industrial

Tribunal had directed the appellant to continue Sivarama

Krishna in Hyderabad office with continuity of service,

however without back wages. Aggrieved by the order dated

27.04.1998 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, the appellant

had filed W.P.No.20724 of 1998.

06. Learned counsel for the appellant had further

contended that the learned Single Judge without appreciating

any of the contentions raised by the appellant had disposed

of the writ petition vide order dated 06.06.2007 and gave a

finding that the transfer order in respect of Sivarama Krishna

is invalid and the learned Single Judge declined to interfere

with the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal.

Challenging the same, the present Writ Appeal is filed.

07. Learned counsel for the appellant had further

contended that the transfer is an incident of service of every

employee of the appellant and in accordance with the

transfer policy of the appellant, Sivarama Krishna was

transferred, but the Industrial Tribunal as well as the learned

Single Judge erred in holding that the transfer of Sivarama

Krishna was held as invalid. Therefore, learned counsel for

the appellant had contended that appropriate orders be

passed in the Writ Appeal by setting aside the order passed

by the Industrial Tribunal in I.D.No.9 of 1997 dated

27.04.1998 and also the order passed by the learned Single

Judge in W.P.No.20724 of 1998, dated 06.06.2007.

08. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent had contended

that the Industrial Tribunal as well as learned Single Judge

have held that the transfer of Sivarama Krishna is invalid and

the learned Single Judge has also directed the appellant to

continue Sivarama Krishna at Hyderabad, with continuity of

service, however, without back wages. Therefore, the

Industrial Tribunal as well as the learned Single Judge have

rightly passed orders in favour of the 2nd respondent and no

inference is called for. Therefore, the Writ Appeal is liable

to be dismissed.

09. Having considered the rival submissions made by the

learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the considered

view that this is a very old case, wherein the transfer of

certain members of 2nd respondent Union was the subject

matter of reference before the Industrial Tribunal and the

learned Single Judge has only held that the transfer order in

respect of Sivarama Krishna is invalid and directed the

appellant to continue Sivarama Krishna in service at

Hyderabad office with continuity of service, however

without back wages. The orders passed by the Industrial

Tribunal and the learned Single Judge are valid and since no

interim directions were granted in the Writ Appeal, the

orders of the Industrial Tribunal and the learned Single

Judge have been worked out itself with the efflux of time. At

this point of time, this Court is not inclined to interfere with

the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

10. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

                                 ____________________________
                                 SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ



                                _________________________________
                                 ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J


Date:    .02.2022
Prv