Back
2002 Supreme(Kar) 732
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Hon'ble Justice N. Kumar, J.
Siddartha Educational Society, by its Secretary - Appellant
Vs.
Tumkur District Technical Institutions Non-Teaching Employees Union (Regd.), by its Secretary and another - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 12937 of 1995
Decided on : 27-11-2002
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. K. Laxminarayana Rao, Sri Ranga Associates
Mr. Ganapathi Hegde
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Labour Court's findings must be within the scope of reference, and employees are entitled to pay scales and benefits from the date of regularization of their services, not from the date of initial appointment.
Headnote:
Labour Dispute - Industrial Disputes Act - [Section 10(1)(c)] - [Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the applicability of Section 2(J) and 2(S) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and Rule 5 of the Karnataka Private Educational Institutions (Discipline and Control) Rules, 1978. The court also considered the judgment in Anand S.S. and Ors. Vs. Management of Mahatma Gandhi Vidya Peeta (Regd.), Bangalore and Anr., 1999 (III) LLJ 1064.]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the award of the Labour Court, which held that the non-teaching employees of an institute were entitled to pay and allowances on par with government technical institutions from the year 1979. The petitioner contended that the Labour Court's findings were beyond the scope of reference and that the employees were not entitled to such benefits.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Labour Court's findings on the scope of reference were beyond jurisdiction and set them aside. It also held that the employees were not entitled to pay scales and benefits from the year 1979, and that the institution had extended benefits to its employees from the date of regularization of their services.
Issues: The issues included the jurisdiction of the Labour Court, entitlement of employees to pay scales and benefits, and the date from which the employees were entitled to such benefits.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Labour Court's findings were beyond jurisdiction and set them aside. It also ruled that the employees were not entitled to pay scales and benefits from the year 1979, and that the institution had extended benefits to its employees from the date of regularization of their services.
Final Decision: The petition was partly allowed, and the Labour Court's award was modified to reflect that the employees were not entitled to pay scales and benefits from the year 1979. The employees were entitled to arrears from 1.1.1998 for the difference in pay scale, and the institution was directed to carry out an exercise to determine the equivalence of posts and confirmations of employment.
Kumar, J.-- The petitioner has challenged in this Writ Petition the award of the Labour Court, Bangalore, dated 2.12.1994 passed in Reference No. 11/90 holding that the respondents are entitled to pay and allowances in the regular time scale pay from the date on which they completed one year of service in the second party management from the date of initial appointment and that they are entitled to receive DA, CCA, HRA and other allowances on par with non-teaching staff of Government Technical Institution and directing the petitioner to pay the same.
2. The aforesaid award came to be passed on a reference made by the Government of Karnataka under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The dispute which was referred for adjudication was as under: -
"(1) Whether the demand of the non-teaching employees of Sri Siddartha Institute of Technology, Tumkur, for revision of payscales, CCA, interim allowance, pay and other allowances, on par with the pay scales, CCA and other allowances paid to the non-teaching staff in Government Technical Institutions from the year 1979 is justified?
(2) If not, what is the relief to which these employees are entitled to?
3. Substantiating their claim the first respondent filed their claim statement as under: -
The first respondent is registered trade union and non-teaching staff of the petitioner are its members. The petitioner institution was established in the year 1979 and is affiliated to Bangalore University and is located in the outskirts of the city of Tumkur in a vast area of 65 acres and it is also recognized by the Institution of Engineers, India, and is getting all kinds of aids from the Government. 43 members mentioned in the claim petition joined the services of the petitioner as non-teaching staff from the dates shown against their names. They are entitled to receive wages, DA and all other allowances and benefits like HRA, CCA new pay scales, increments, washing allowance, interim relief, etc., on par with the employees working in Government technical institutions as per various Government notification published by the Government on different dates, from the dates of their appointment which is not extended to them. The petitioner paid not only less wages to these employees but also fixed their salaries unilaterally according to their whims and fancies. Hence, the employees are entitled to get their arrears from the management as shown against their names. They also claimed interest at 25% p.a. on the amounts due. They claimed a sum of Rs.9,17,424.35 as the balance amount due to the 42 workmen for the period between 1979-88. They have set out in the claim statement the names of the employees, their designation, date of joining the duty and the balance amount due to each of them. The petitioner had issued individual appointment orders to the majority of the workmen at the time of recruitment fixing up the suitable scales and grades agreeing to pay all other admissible allowances as per Government of Karnataka pay scales. Therefore, they prayed for a direction to the second party workmen to pay wages, DA, washing allowance, HRA, CCA, new pay scales, increments, interim relief, etc., to them on par with the Government scales prescribed from time to time to the non-teaching staff of employees of Government technical institutions.
4. The petitioner has filed their counter statement opposing the said claim. It is contended by them that the petitioner Sri Siddartha Institute of Technology is established by Sri Siddartha Education Society, a body registered under the Societies Registration Act. Siddartha Institute of Technology is an unaided institution. The society is a social service organization established for the purpose of imparting education in rural area. It is not a productive oriented or profit oriented organization. The main object was to impart education to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the said institution is run by members belonging to that class. It is
