Back
2018 Supreme(Pat) 1081
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Sanjay Priya, J.
Rajveer Singh Dahiya General Manager Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. - Appellant
Vs.
State of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 22954 of 2015
Decided On : 01-08-2018
Amlesh Kumar Verma, Adv., Kumar V. Naryan, Adv., Ray Saurabh Nath, Adv.
Once a final order is passed, all earlier interim orders merge into the final order and cease to exist.
Headnote:
Industrial Disputes Act - Quashing of Order - Sections 25(T), 25(U), 29
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to quash an order of cognizance passed against them for non-implementation of an award under the Industrial Disputes Act. The award had been challenged and set aside by the High Court and the Supreme Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution was misconceived as the award had been quashed by the High Court and upheld by the Supreme Court. The court quashed the impugned order and the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the prosecution under the Industrial Disputes Act in light of the quashed award.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that once a final order is passed, all earlier interim orders merge into the final order and cease to exist. The prosecution was deemed misconceived as the award had been quashed and upheld by the Supreme Court.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned order and the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners.
Sanjay Priya, J.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 23.01.2015 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in Complaint Case No.5(C-2)/2015 by which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioners for the offence under Sections 25(T), 25(U) [wrongly mentioned in the impugned order as 26(U)] & 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
2. The prosecution case made in the complaint dated 27.12.2014 lodged by the Deputy Labour commissioner, Patna Division, is that in terms of the award dated 11.03.1983, passed by the Labour Court, Patna in Reference Case No.14 of 1980 and order dated 04.04.1985 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP No.5086 of 1985, the management of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. was required to implement the order of the Labour Court. The Officer in this connection (Sri C.D. Singh) submitted one application before the Labour Commissioner, upon which the office of the Labour Commissioner, vide departmental letter No.762 dated 05.03.2014 and letter No.1305 dated 09.05.2014, organized a meeting at the level of Labour Commissioner for implementation of the award by the management and after having failed in that process, the prosecution has been filed against the accused persons under Section 25(T), 25(U) [wrongly mentioned in the impugned order as 26(U)] and 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Department, vide its letter Nos. 3612 and 3613 dated 04.12.2014, has authorized Deputy Labour Commissioner (Opposite Party No. 2), Patna to file the present complaint against the management of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
3. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna has taken cognizance in the matter on the aforesaid complaint under the relevant sections of Industrial Disputes Act by the impugned order.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State as well as for the Opposite Party No.2. Also heard counsel for the Intervener-Officer.
5. During hearing of this application, one Interlocutory Application bearing I.A. No.1953 of 2016 has been filed on behalf of the Officer concerned, namely, Sri C.D. Singh under Section 482 Cr.P.C. making prayer to allow him to be impleaded as Opposite Party-intervener this application. This Court although did not pass any final order on the aforesaid interlocutory application during hearing of this application, but allowed the counsel, who had filed I.A. No.1953 of 2016 on behalf of Officer, C.D. Singh, to make argument in the case to understand the correct position of the matter and reserved the judgment along with order to be passed on the aforesaid interlocutory application.
6. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that prosecution case is based on non-est grounds as the award dated 11.03.1983, for non-implementation of which instant case has been filed, was challenged by the management of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. in writ application bearing C.W.J.C. No.5877 of 1983 before this Hon'ble Court which quashed the impugned award by its order dated 30.03.1988. The Special Leave Application was filed by the Officer concerned, which was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Opposite Party No. 2 has filed the instant complaint by making concealment of all these facts although both were part of record of the Opposite Party No.2.
7. Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the Hon'ble Court while setting aside the impugned award dated 11.03.1983 vide CWJC No.5877 of 1983 & CWJC No.4377 of 1984 held in para 20 of the judgment that Labour Court was not justified in ordering promotion of Sri C.D. Singh from Grade A to Grade B and from Grade B to Grade-C, which was not and cannot be a function of the Labour Court. The impugned award has, therefore, to be quashed and set aside. The Hon'ble Court was further pleased to direct the management in the aforesaid judgment to consider the workman's case for promotion to higher scale of pa
