The main legal principle established in the judgment is the obligation of the authorities to ensure expeditious recovery of workers' dues under the Recovery Certificates, and the duty of entities like the National Textile Corporation and Union of India to discharge their liabilities under the recovery certificates promptly.

JUDGMENT :

S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.—Rule, Returnable forthwith by consent. Service on respondent No. 7 dispensed with. Union of India served.

2. Petitioners pray for direction to the State Government, Collector Mumbai as well as Registrar, Industrial Court to take appropriate steps to recover amounts under Recovery Certificates issued in their favour.

3. The Recovery Certificates are issued u/s 33-C(l) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which reads as under:

"33-C(l): Where any money is due to a workman from an employer under a settlement or an award or under the provisions of Chapter V-A or Chapter V-B, the workman himself or any other person; authorised by him in writing in this behalf, or, in the case of the death of the workman, his assignee or heirs may, without prejudice to any other mode of recovery, make an application to the appropriate Government; for the recovery of the money due to him and if the appropriate Government is satisfied that any money is so due, it shall issue certificate for that amount to the Collector who shall proceed to recover the same in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue".

4. A perusal of this provision indicates that it contemplates recovery of money due from employer to a workman, by making an application to appropriate Government for recovery of the same which upon satisfaction of appropriate Government is then mentioned in a certificate. The certificate is thereafter forwarded to the Collector. The mandate to the Collector is to proceed to recover the dues mentioned in the same manner as arrears of land revenue.

5. In Writ Petition No. 268 of 1998 decided on July 6, 1998 in the case of Islam Ali Vs. D. Dayaram and Co. and Others, (1999) 3 LLJ 1144 this Court has directed that the State Government and the Authorities exercising powers under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code should ensure that the dues of workmen are collected within a reasonable period and has further proceeded to lay down the period as well. It has directed that these authorities should endeavour to recover certified amount within three months except where there are extraordinary good reasons for delay. It appears that despite pronouncement by this Court, the State Government and authorities under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code have not taken any steps to expedite such recoveries, leave alone, making any endeavour to recover certified amounts within a period of three months. These are really sorry state of affairs. It is in this background that we are approaching the issue.

6. A provision of similar nature is incorporated in Section 50 of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.P. Act). We have been faced with a request similar to that made in this petition by number of employees and more particularly from the employees of textile mills in Mumbai. Elsewhere also it is observed that the Collector has not initiated steps to recover 1 the amounts under the recovery certificate in accordance with the provisions made in Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 expeditiously. The delay in recovery has forced number of workmen/employees to approach 1 this Court with a prayer for issuance of writ of mandamus to the authorities to fulfil their statutory obligations.

7. At the outset, we wish to make it clear that in this case we are not concerned with the correctness or validity of the certificate. What we are really concerned is with the expeditious recovery of the dues under the same. The principal grievance of the petitioner is that far from being diligent, the authorities in charge of such recovery are not taking any steps to recover the dues of the employees forcing them to complete starvation. That the dues are admitted and that recovery certificates have gained finality, is not in dispute. All that remains is actual recovery of the dues and handing over the same to the concerned employee.

8. For a proper appreciation of the procedure of recovery under Maha