A dismissal order remains valid and enforceable unless overturned by a competent court, rendering associated claims for back wages unmeritorious.

Hearing concluded on : 10.07.2025 Judgment on : 17.07.2025 Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.:

1. The writ application has been preferred praying for direction upon respondent no. 3 to cancel, set aside and rescind Order dated July 30, 2015 in Comp. Case No. 35 of 2002 whereby the learned Judge was pleased to dismiss the case under Section 33 -C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 .

2. The petitioner’s case is that he was a permanent employee of the respondent no. 2, being employee no. 561 and he was posted in the Behala Unit at 25, Ho Chi Minh Sarani, P. S. Thakurpukur, Kolkata – 700 061, Dist. South 24 Parganas. On 4^th April, 1998, the employer company issued a purported charge sheet to the petitioner with mala fide intention and on 7^th June, 1999 the respondent company filed a purported application before the learned Tribunal under Section 33 (2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for approval of the said dismissal of the petitioner.

3. The application under Section 33 (2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was heard by the learned 8^th Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal and on contested hearing, the learned Tribunal by an Order No. 71 dated 09.08.2002 was pleased to dismiss the application of the company, holding inter alia that the petition does not lie in accordance with the provision of Section 33 (2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and was also pleased not to confirm the dismissal of the petitioner.

4. The petitioner then filed an application under Section 33 -C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for back wages including ancillary benefits and sent a letter dated 12/08/2002 to the said company demanding immediate reinstatement in service with full benefits.

5. The respondent company herein sent a letter to the petitioner on

28/08/2002, wherein the company stated that the Tribunal has no authority to grant any approval of the action taken against the workmen by the company in respect of dismissal from his service and as such the request made by the petitioner to allow him to join in his post and to pay him his back wages does not arise and thus the Order of dismissing the petitioner from the service of the company vide letter dated 07/06/1999 still stands and is in force.

6. The order in respect of the application under Section 33 -C (2) of the I.D. Act. is under challenge in the present writ application.

7. The petitioner has appeared in person.

8. The findings of the learned Judge, 1^st Labour Court, in the order under challenge, is as follows:

“Going through the entire order it is fully clear that the Ld. Tribunal by virtue of the Order No. 71. dt. 09.08.2002 did not write a single word against the order of dismissal dt. 07.06.1999 against the applicant, Shri Bidhu Bhusan Sakar. Under such circumstances, it can safely be said that whether the order of dismissal dt. 07.06.1999 is illegal or unjustified has not been adjudicated by any court of law till now. Then undoubtedly the said order of dismissal dt. 07.06.1999 against the applicant Shri Bidhu Bhusan Sarkar stands. Unless and until the order of dismissal is set aside by any court of law, the instant Order No.71, dt. 09.08.2002 cannot be the basis of the instant claim. Till today the order of dismissal stands. So, the applicant has no basis to claim any back wages. Coming here, I am compelled to form my opinion that the applicant has been continuing his case to base upon an order about which the applicant is fully under misconception. Besides the above, the applicant filed a writ petition No.1365 (W) of 2002 during pendency of the instant case to base upo