Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.N. PATHAK, J.
Managing Director, Steel Authority of India Ltd., through Mr. J.T. Kongari - Petitioner
Versus
Workman represented by Bokaro Karmachari Panchayat - Respondents
W.P. (L) No. 993 of 2017
Decided On : 14-01-2021
Standing Orders – Rule 8 – Date of Birth – Superannuation – Backwages – Petitioner-Management has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing Award, passed by Labour Court, Bokaro in Ref. Case, whereby, it has been held that workman is entitled for full back wages along with all consequential benefits w.e.f. 01.07.2003 to his actual date of superannuation i.e. 30.11.2006. – Held, It appears that workman was in habit of mentioning different date of birth in different documents of service records. – Not a single chit of paper or any document was produced by workman to show that his actual date of birth was 10.06.1951 and it was management, who changed date of birth to 1943 – In absence of any document produced before Court below, no Court can come to a conclusion and form its opinion that date of birth relied upon by workman can be said to be a gospel truth. – Even taking into consideration that reference itself was made after eight years of dispute, was itself a stale claim as dispute was not in existence after retirement and also in view of settled law that no dispute can be raised at fag end of service career. – Issue is no more res-integra as has been held in plethora of judgments of this Court and that of Honble Apex Court. – Court is fully cautious of fact that normally no interference is warranted unless orders are perverse and material evidences have not been considered. – Legal propositions and judicial pronouncements, Award passed in Ref. Case is hereby quashed and set aside. – Legal propositions and judicial pronouncements, Award passed in Ref. Case is hereby quashed and set aside. – Writ Petition Allowed
JUDGMENT :
S.N. PATHAK, J.:— Heard the parties.
2. Petitioner-Management has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the Award dated 22.02.2016, passed by learned Labour Court, Bokaro in Ref. Case No. 14 of 2008, whereby, it has been held that the workman is entitled for full back wages along with all consequential benefits w.e.f. 01.07.2003 to his actual date of superannuation i.e. 30.11.2006.
3. The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. The workman-Sri. Dipti Ansari joined the services of petitioner-Management on 18.06.1981. Subsequently, he was dismissed from the services on 19.06.1986 on the ground of unauthorized absence from the work place. However, he was again appointed to the post of Casual Khalasi on 18.11.1991 with new Staff No. 687105. At the time of joining services on 18.11.1991, the workman submitted attestation form and P.D. form, wherein he disclosed his age as 45 years and date of birth as 04.06.1943. However, it was the case of the workman before the learned Labourt Court that as he failed to submit any certificate with regard to his date of birth, he was sent before the Medical Board for the purpose of assessment of his age and on the basis of assessment of his age by the Medical Board, he was supposed to superannuate from service on 30.11.2006 but petitioner-Management has prematurely retired him on 30.06.2003, changing his date of birth from 10.06.1951 to 04.06.1943. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner through his sponsoring Union raised an industrial dispute before the concerned Department of State Govt., which was referred to the Labour Court, Bokaro vide notification dated 03.07.2008 for adjudication by framing the following issue:
4. After receipt of the reference, the learned Labour Court issued notices to both the parties. Upon receipt of the notice, both parties appeared and filed their respective written statements and also adduced evidences in support of their cases. Thereafter, after hearing the parties and perusing the documents and evidences brought on record, the learned Labour Court answered the reference in favour of the workman and against the management. The relevant portion of Award dated 22.08.2016 reads as under:
…………… therefore, the workman is entitled for full back wages along with all consequential benefits w.e.f. 01.07.2003 to his actual date of superannuation i.e. 30.11.2006. The management is directed to implement the award within three months from the date of pronouncement of this Award.
5. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner-management has knocked the door of this Court.
6. Mr. Bibhash Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-management vociferously argues that Award dated 22.08.2016 passed by learned Labour Court, Bokaro in Ref. Case No. 14 of 2008 is bad in law and perverse, hence, liable to be set aside by this Court. Learned Labour Court has misinterpreted the provisions contained in Rule-8(B) of the Standing Orders of the Management of BSL and thus, came to a wrong conclusion. Learned counsel further argues that the learned Labour Court failed to appreciate that as per the admitted case of the workman since he has disclosed his date of birth as 04.06.1943, while he was earlier in the service of the Management, therefore, on second occasion i.e. on 18.11.1991, when he joined service of petitioner-management there is no ground for application of Clause-8(b) of the Standing Orders. Learned Labour Court has misdirected itself
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
