JUDGMENT :

G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following relief:

“(I) To quash the office order bearing order no. 144 dated 08.02.2008 issued under the signature of V. N. Jha, Director Vigilance and Security (In- Charge Chief Personnel) in the department of Bihar sate road transport department Govt. of Bihar Patna.. Whereby and where under it is further directed that the back wages of the petitioner shall not be paid.

(II) To direct the respondent authority to pay the entire back wages of the petitioner in view of order dated 22.8.2006 passed by Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Patna in reference case no. 39/1995 with statutory interest over the amount.

(III) Also to direct respondent authority to provide all consequential benefits of the petitioner in view of above mentioned order.

(IV) Also any other relief/reliefs for which petitioner is found to be entitled in the eye of law.”

2. The case of the petitioner, as culled out from the writ petition, is that he was initially appointed as a Driver in the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation on 20.06.1988. It is stated that he discharged his duties sincerely and was posted on the Patna–Darbhanga Deluxe Bus route. According to the petitioner, during the course of inspection, four passengers were found travelling without ticket. A domestic enquiry was initiated against him and he was suspended on 19.03.1990. It is alleged that the enquiry was conducted in violation of principles of natural justice and without affording him adequate opportunity of hearing. Ultimately, vide order dated 16.09.1991, he was dismissed from service.

3. It is further stated that the petitioner challenged the order of dismissal before the Labour Court, Patna, which was registered as Reference Case No. 39/1995. After adjudication by award dated 22.08.2006, the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Patna directed reinstatement of the petitioner along with payment of full back wages and other consequential benefits. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though he was reinstated to service pursuant to the award, vide Office Order No. 144 dated 08.02.2008 but the respondents denied payment of back wages. According to him, such action is illegal and amounts to non-compliance of the award passed by the Labour Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been working since his reinstatement with sincerity and the denial of back wages for nearly 15 years is wholly arbitrary and unsustainable in law.

4. Per contra, the Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has opposed the writ petition. It is submitted that the writ petition is hit by delay and laches. The cause of action had arisen in the year 2006 and the impugned office order was passed in the year 2008, whereas the petitioner has approached this Court after several years without any plausible explanation.

5. It is further submitted that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy under Section 33-C(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for recovery of money, in terms of the award, but the same has not been availed. Hence, the writ petition is not maintainable.

6. The Learned counsel draws attention towards Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act which deals with enforceability of awards and submitted that the award has become inoperative by virtue of Section 19 of the Act. Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act, reads as follows:

“17A. Commencement of the award.—(1) An award (including an arbitration award) shall become enforceable on the expiry of thirty days from the date of its publication under section 17:

Provided that—

(a) if the appropriate Government is of opinion, in any case where the award has been given by a Labour Court or Tribunal in relation to an industrial dispute to which it is a party; or

(b) if the Central Government is of opinion, in any case where the award has been given by a National Tribunal, that it will be inexpedient on public grounds affecting national e