IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:-

HON’BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE DAS CO 1528 OF 2012 THE BLOOMFIELD TEA CO. LTD.

VS AMARNATH CHATTERJEE For the Petitioner : Mr. Shounak Mukhopadhyay, Adv.

Mr. Sayantan Bose, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Gope, Adv.

For the Opposite Party : Mr. Jayanta Dasgupta, Adv.

Mr. Balaram Patra, Adv.

Last Heard on : 22.05.2025 Judgement on : 11.06.2025 CHAITALI CHATTERJEE DAS, J:-

1. This revisional application is directed against an order of affirmation dated

29th February, 2012 passed by the learned Judge Kolkata in compensation case number 15 of 1999. The brief fact of the case is that the respondent was engaged by the petitioner sometimes in the year 1968 as an Export Assistant for a period of 6 months as probationer and subsequently terminated on 1st February 1972, taking into consideration that his service was no longer required.

Brief Resume of the case.

2. A proceeding was initiated before the 7th Industrial Tribunal at the instance of the Opposite Party /employee praying for setting aside such order of termination. This case has a chequred history .The initial attempt of the opposite party was turned down but later on by virtue of direction of the High Court at Calcutta, was treated as an Industrial Disputes within the meaning of section 20 A of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Government of West Bengal by its order dated 20.9.82 referred the dispute to the Tribunal Application treating the same within the meaning of section 20 A of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and a proceeding was registered. An award was passed on 7th September 1990 by the said court whereby, the order of termination was set aside and direction was given to reinstate the opposite party with full back wages and other financial benefits. It was further directed by the Tribunal that the opposite party shall be deemed to be in service from the date of termination that is 1st February 1972. The said award was challenged by the present petitioner company before this Hon’ble High Court being W.P. No. 290 of 1992.

3. An order of stay of the operation of the award was directed by the High Court but the petition was dismissed for default and then application for recalling of such order was filed by the present petitioner which is pending as of now. On 1st March 1999 the opposite party filed an application under Section 33C-(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 before the 1st labour court, West Bengal, as compensation case number 15 of 1999 with the prayer for computation of monetary benefits in terms of the award dated 7th September, 1990 . Vide an order dated 20th April, 2006 the said court allowed the claim of the respondent taking into consideration the monthly increment at the rate of ₹8/- per month. Accordingly, the amount determined was ₹8, 50, 754. 65 as payable by the petitioner company to the Opposite Party.

4. Being aggrieved by such order a writ petition being WP number 16793 (W) of

2006 was filed by the present petitioner for setting aside the order of the Tribunal. The Hon’ble court by virtue of an order passed on 4th September, 2006 quashed the order with a direction to the petitioner to deposit the sum of ₹2, 00,000 and also directed the learned labour court to hear out the application under Section 33-C (2) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties.

5. Accordingly, fresh application was filed and the present petitioner also filed additional written statement. After taking evidence and after going through the pleadings, by a judgement and order dated 29th February, 2012 the labour court held that the opposite party is entitled to a further sum of ₹5, 16, 431 in addition to the sum of ₹2, 00, 000 and ₹41, 280 already paid by the petitioner, to the opposite party calculating the salary amount with rs 8/- per month as increment .Challenging such order of the learned labour court Kolkata, this revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitu