( 1 ) THE petitioner management has filed the present writ petition being aggrieved by an order dated 19th January, 2005 passed by the Labour Court on an application filed by the respondent workman under Section 33-C (2)of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ).

( 2 ) THE facts leading to the filing of the aforesaid application by the respondent workman are that on 11th August, 1973, an agreement of Wage revision was entered into by the petitioner management with its workers' union. However, certain points of dispute were referred for decision to the sole Arbitrator, Sh. G. Venkata Swamy on 18th October, 1973. The arbitrator gave an interim award on 24th October, 1973 which was implemented by the petitioner management. The arbitrator gave his final award on 21st march, 1977 but the same was not implemented by the petitioner management. As a result, the workers' union raised a dispute which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal by the appropriate authority vide order dated 17th February, 1978. The Industrial Tribunal passed an award dated 28th January, 1988 whereunder the award of the sole arbitrator was confirmed and the petitioner was directed to implement the same.

( 3 ) AGGRIEVED by the aforesaid award, the petitioner management challenged the same by filing a writ petition, which was dismissed by the high Court. The petitioner management assailed the aforesaid order of the high Court before the Supreme Court by filing an SLP which was also dismissed on 20th September, 1988. Thus, the litigation pertaining to the award dated 28th January, 1988 attained finality. However, even thereafter, the petitioner management did not implement the award and make payments of the salaries to the respondent workman.

( 4 ) IN the meantime, in the year 1991, the respondent workman filed an application before the Labour Court under Section 33-C (2) of the Act seeking directions to the petitioner management to make payment towards arrears of pay with interest at the bank rate and revise the basic pay scale of the respondent workman with effect from 1st November, 1991. During the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, on 8th December, 2004, the Labour court was informed that the petitioner management had implemented the award in the year 1995 and wages which were refixed as per the award had already been paid to the respondent workman. Thus, it was stated on behalf of the petitioner management that nothing further survived in the writ petition. It was also stated that the claim for payment of interest could not be made by the respondent workman as the jurisdiction of the Labour Court while exercising powers under Section 33-C (2) of the Act were very limited. After hearing the counsels for the parties, the Labour Court passed the impugned award relying on a judgment rendered by the Allahabad High court in the case of Union of India and Another v. S. B. Agnihotri and another, LLJ 1991 603 and awarded interest @ 6% p. a. to the respondent workman from the year 1989 till the date of filing of the LCA along with costs of Rs. 5,000/ -.

( 5 ) THE dispute between the parties lies in a narrow compass. The only ground taken on behalf of the petitioner management to assail the aforesaid award is that the Labour Court could not have awarded interest in favour of the respondent workman for the reason that there was no existing right in favour of the respondent workman which entitled him to claim interest as the said right had not been determined and crystalized in any adjudication including the award dated 28th January, 1988, passed by the industrial Tribunal. Thus, it was argued that the Labour Court did not have the jurisdiction to award interest for the first time in proceedings taken out by the respondent workman under Section 33 (2) (b) of the Act.

( 6 ) IN support of the aforesaid contention, counsel for the petitioner management relied on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of municipal Corporation o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document