Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 63573
KERALA HIGH COURT
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J
Chadayamangalam Rubber Marketing Co-operative Society v. District Labour Officer and Others
Writ Petition No. [Insert number] | Claim Petition No. 16/2016
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.Arjun Raghavan
For the Respondents: Sri.Dharmadan
The definition of 'workman' under the Industrial Dispute Act excludes those in managerial positions, limiting claims under S.33(C)(2) accordingly.
Headnote:The Court deliberated on a challenge against an order of the Labour Court under S.33
(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, referencing prior judgments that established the scope of the Arbitration Court's jurisdiction. It was determined that the respondent did not qualify as a 'workman' under S.2(S) due to their position, thereby affirming the dismissal of claims based on prior agreements. The writ was disposed by quashing the Labour Court's award and show cause notice.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to order regarding labour court's jurisdiction under industrial disputes act. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments on the service classification and claim maintainability. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. discussion on applicable laws and definitions related to the case. (Para 7 , 10) |
| 4. final ruling on award quashing and assessment of claims. (Para 8 , 11) |
1. Writ petition on behalf of society has been filed laying challenge to the order of the Labour Court under S.33(C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act dated 09.02.2021 Ex.P8. The controversy in this case has already been narrated in the judgment of this Court dated 23.10.2020 Ext.P4 wherein society had challenged the order of the Arbitration Court and Tribunal allowing the arbitration claim of the respondent, who at the initial service was appointed as clerk on 11.05.1967, was promoted from time to time and lastly to the post of Secretary, which was designated as Managing Director. A show cause notice dated 04.10.2000 was served upon seeking explanation and dissatisfied with the explanation, the society decided to initiate disciplinary proceedings, which resulted into suspension with effect from 21.10.2000 pending enquiry. Enquiry officer submitted a report on 25.01.2002 holding the respondent guilty of charges. Sub committee vide decision dated 25.02.2002 decided to dismiss the party respondent from the service. It is in that background the proceedings reached the Arbitration Court. The management / Society raised the plea that the Arbitration Court could not order reinstatement and grant of service benefits in view of the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Ambika T.N. v. Kottappady Service Co - operative Bank Ltd. No.E.155 and Others (2018 (4) KHC 493). This Court was also brought to the notice that the respondent had also filed a petition under S.33 (C)(2) for claiming certain benefits as recorded in paragraph 10 of the judgment Ext.P4. Noticing all these contentions, this Court accepted the plea of the society by directing the Arbitration Court to assess the damages and composition to be awarded to the respondent in view of the harassment and spate of litigation for number of years and as regards the other claims regarding backwages, was to be considered in the pending application.
2. When the matter was pending before the Arbitration Court for assessment of the damages a settlement was arrived at resulting into payment of Rs.2,00,000/- on 27.04.2021. However, in the meantime a claim petition No.16/2016 had already been preferred by the party respondent before the Labour Court under 33(C)(2) wherein petitioner society did not put in appearance resulted into following directions:
"6) In the result the claim petition is allowed as follows:
a. Opposite party is directed to pay the following amounts:
i. Rs.6,93,311/- (Rupees six lakhs ninety three thousand three hundred and eleven only) towards balance monthly pay arrears.
ii. Rs.11,60,751/- (Rupees eleven lakhs sixty thousand seven hundred and fifty one only) towards interest @ 10% of balance monthly pay arrears from 21.10.2000 to 31.05.2019.
iii. Rs.80,860/- (Rupees eighty thousand eight hundred and sixty only) towards earned leave wages and Rs.1,10,509/- (Rupees one lakh ten thousand five hundred and nine only) towards its interest.
iv. Rs.88,000/- (Rupees eighty eight only) towards bonus arrears and Rs.1,27,467/- (Rupees one lakh twenty seven thousand four hundred and sixty seven only) towards its interest.
V. Remit Rs.68,178/- (Rupees sixty eight thousand one hundred and seventy eight only) towards arrears of pension contribution payable to co - operative society pension board.
vi. The above sum shall be paid within one month, failing which the amount will carry interest @ 10% per annum from the date of application (25.06.2019) till payment.
Pronounced in Open Court this the 9th day of February 2021."
3. Sri.Arjun Raghavan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the provisions of S.
