Telangana High Court
Apsrtc., Nalgonda Dist. vs The Presiding Officerf.A.C.,Labour ... on 6 March, 2024
Author: Juvvadi Sridevi
Bench: Juvvadi Sridevi
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
WRIT PETITION No.34501 of 2016
ORDER:
Petitioner/RTC has questioned the order dated 17.02.2016
passed by the Labour Court in Miscellaneous Petition No.3 of 2013,
directing the RTC to pay an amount of Rs.4,65,089/- with interest
@6% per annum from the date of filing of said petition.
2. Heard both sides and perused the record.
3. Respondent No.2 was engaged as a Casual Conductor on
daily wage basis on 05.05.1987 and his services were regularized
on 05.08.1987. On the ground of un-authorized absence, a charge
sheet was issued to him on 15.01.1993 and he was removed from
service vide order dated 31.05.1993. Questioning the same, he has
filed an appeal and review, but the same were rejected. Being
aggrieved by the same, petitioner has approached the Labour Court
by filing I.D. The Labour Court, after considering the material
before it, set aside the order of removal and ordered for
re-instatement of petitioner as a fresh Conductor, however, without
continuity of service, attendant benefits and back wages, against
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi
which, he filed W.P.No.4640 of 2000 before this Court and this
Court vide order dated 20.08.2005, modified the Award of Labour
Court by reinstating the 2nd respondent with continuity of service,
however, without attendant benefits and back wages. Thereafter,
he has filed M.P.No.3 of 2013 before the Labour Court and the
Labour Court, by impugned order, directed the RTC to pay
Rs.4,65,089/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of his
entitlement. Aggrieved thereby, the RTC is before this Court.
4. It is contended by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for
the petitioner that the 2nd respondent has un-authorizedly absconded
from duty from 15.01.1993 causing much inconvenience and also
causing loss of revenue to the Corporation. It is also contended that
on earlier occasions also, 15 times, the 2nd respondent was censured
for his misconduct and his annual increments were deferred.
Therefore, considering the same, the 2nd respondent was removed
from service after conducting inquiry. It is contended that pursuant to
modification of the order of Labour Court by this Court, petitioner's
service was accounted as continuity of service without any back
wages and attendant benefits, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for
incremental arrears from September, 2005 to October, 2013, to the
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi
tune of Rs.1,94,107/- only, but not to Rs.4,65,089/- as directed by the
Labour Court. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition by
setting aside the order of Labour Court.
5. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent, on the other hand,
contended that the Labour Court after considering the matter
thoroughly, has set aside the punishment and directed the RTC to pay
Rs.4,65,089/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of his
entitlement and there are no grounds to interfere with the same and
that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
6. A perusal of the order passed by the Labour Court discloses
that the petitioner has proved that he is entitled for arrears of wages
from the date of his removal till date of his reinstatement i.e., January,
1998 but the respondent has calculated the arrears from 2005 i.e.,
from the date of judgment of the Hon'ble High Court which is not
correct and the petitioner is entitled for arrears of wages from
January, 1998 onwards. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for
Rs.4,65,089/- (Rupees four lakhs sixty five thousand and eighty nine
only). Respondent has not paid the said amount therefore the
petitioner is entitled for interest @6% per annum from the date of
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi
filing this petition i.e., 09.04.2013 till realization. Having perused the
reasons assigned by the Labour Court, this Court is of the considered
view that there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by
the Labour Court.
7. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is liable to be
dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner
herein/RTC shall comply with the orders of Labour Court within
two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order,
after deducting the amounts paid, if any, pursuant to the interim
orders of this Court dated 13.10.2016. There shall be no order as to
costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________
JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J
Date: 06.03.2024
lk
