IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that the appellant was not a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act, affirming the Tribunal's lack of jurisdiction over the complaint.

JUDGMENT :

(Navneet Kumar, J.) :

This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 13th September 2023 passed in W.P.(L) No. 4527 of 2018 whereby and where under the writ petition filed by the respondent/ writ petitioner – The Food Corporation of India challenging the award dated 15.01.2018 has been allowed.

2. Briefly stated, the writ petitioner/ respondent-The Food Corporation of India had preferred the writ petition challenging the award dated 15th January 2018 whereby the action of the respondent – Corporation in dismissing the complainant/appellant herein - Upendra Prasad with forfeiture of post-retirement benefits including gratuity dated 30th November 2012 and the order of the appellate authority dated 1st May 2013 confirming the punishment were held to be illegal and unjustified. The respondent-Corporation was further directed to pay full back wages to the complainant/ appellant herein- Upendra Ram as well as other benefits including gratuity after effecting reduction of two increments in order to maintain parity as his co-delinquent whose case has been decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP(C) No. 22573 of 2015 and the directions were to be implemented within a period of one month from the date of publication of award in the Gazette of India.

3. Being aggrieved, writ petitioner/respondent-Corporation preferred the instant writ petition being W.P.(L) No. 4527 of 2018 with the following prayer:

I. For issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing and/or setting aside the award dated 15.01.2018 (Annexure-15) passed by Shri Ranjan Kumar Saran, the Learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Complaint Case no. 3/2013a, whereby the punishment order against the Respondent has been set aside with a direction that the Respondent would be entitled to full back wages including gratuity after reduction of two increments.

II. For issuance of writ of certiorari for also quashing order dated 03.02.2017 (Annexure-10) passed by Shri Ranjan Kumar Saran, the Learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad in Complaint Case no. 3/2013, whereby the Disciplinary Enquiry conducted against the respondent has been held to be unfair and improper on the grounds of change of Enquiry Officer and perversity in the findings of the Enquiry Report.

III. For issuance of any other appropriate writ/order/direction for grant of such other reliefs as may be incidental or consequential to or connected with setting aside of the aforesaid impugned order and for doing conscionable justice to the Petitioner.

IV. For issuance of direction to stay the operation of the impugned award dated 15.01.2018 during pendency of the instant writ petition.

4. The learned writ Court after hearing the parties, by the impugned judgment dated 13th September 2023 relying upon the judgment dated 4th August 2023 rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 446 of 2019 allowed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner and the award dated 15th January 2018 was quashed and set aside holding as under:

7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials available in the record, this Court; in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No.446 of 2019 wherein the Hon’ble Division Bench in no uncertain manner has held that the Assistant Grade-I (D) of the petitioner- Food Corporation of India is not a workman under Section 2 (s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Hence, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-I, Dhanbad has no jurisdiction to entertain the Complaint No.3/2013 filed under Section 33 (A) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 as the complainant before it was not a workman in terms of Section 2 (s) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. Hence, the impugned award dated 15.01.2018 passed in Complaint Cas