Back
2020 Supreme(Online)(KER) 4037
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
AMIT RAWAL, J
CENTRAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES, – Appellant
Versus
M/S. MARYAN APPARELS (P) LIMITED, – Respondent
WP(C)/11379/2020
SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR
The decision establishes that judicial remedies extending from a Tribunal ruling can apply broadly to similarly situated employees to ensure equitable treatment and mitigate litigation costs.
Headnote:
Writ - Employee Benefits - Tribunal Orders - Damages Reduction and Applicability
Fact of the Case:
The case involves multiple writ petitions challenging a Tribunal's order that reduced damages from 100% to 70%. One employee filed the petition, prompting the court to consider the applicability of this ruling to other employees.
Finding of the Court:
The court decided to dispose of the writ petitions similarly to a prior case, allowing the benefits of the earlier judgment to extend to non-petitioning employees.
Issues: Whether the Tribunal's reduction of damages should apply uniformly to all affected employees, including those who did not file writ petitions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the benefits of the Tribunal's earlier decision should be made accessible to all employees, regardless of their participation in litigation, to prevent unnecessary legal costs.
Final Decision: The court affirmed the Tribunal's order and extended its benefits to all employees.
JUDGMENT
WP(C).Nos.11379, 11402 11406 & 11421 OF 2020(V)
These writ petitions are against the order of the Tribunal whereby the 100% damages have been reduced to 70%. This Court in WP(C)No.11001/2020 vide judgment dated 08.06.2020 remitted the matter to the Tribunal. Therefore, these writ petitions are also disposed of in the same manner.
K.C.Santhosh Kumar, the learned counsel submits that only one employee had filed writ petition whereas the Tribunal had disposed of four matters. In these circumstances, it is directed, the benefits of the aforesaid judgment would be applicable to the other employees who have not chosen to file writ petition, preventing the cost of the litigation.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11379/2020 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED
26.2.2018 BEARING APPEAL NO.63/2018 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED
12.08.2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEARING EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.02.2020 IN APPEAL NO.62/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL COM LABOUR COURT , ERNAKULAM APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11402/2020 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED
12.02.2015 BEARING APPEAL NO.169/2019 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED AUGUST, 2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.02.2020 IN APPEAL NO. 169/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11406/2020 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED
22-03-2019 BEARING APPEAL NO. 259/2019 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED
12-08-2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03-02-2020 IN APPEAL NO. 259/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11421/2020 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED
05.11.2016 BEARING APPEAL NO.204/2018 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED
21.04.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.02.2020 IN APPEAL NO.204/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM.
