THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION No.13046 OF 2006

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“...to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to and connected with the order dated 2.5.2006 passed in Misc. Petition No.38 of 2005 on the file of the 2^nd Respondent and quash the same and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case...”

2. The facts of the case are that respondent No.1, an employee of petitioner-Corporation, filed Miscellaneous Petition No.38 of 2005 before respondent No.2/Labour Court-I seeking computation of his salary on the basis of the Revised Pay Scales-1978, i.e., Rs.325-500 on par with the other similarly placed employees, which was allowed vide order dated 02.05.2006, directing the petitioner-Corporation to re-fix the salary of respondent No.1 as per the Revised Pay Scale-1978 at the scale of Rs.325-500 and to pay the arrears within two months from the date of the said order, failing which, respondent No.1 was entitled to recover the same with interest @ 9% from the date of the said order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner-Corporation filed the present Writ Petition.

3. Heard Sri M.Srikanth Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, appearing for the petitioner; Sri K.S.V.Subba Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1; learned Government Pleader for Labour appearing for respondent No.2; and learned Government Pleader for Finance and Planning appearing for respondent No.3.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-Corporation is a body governed by the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and respondent No.1 was appointed as a Messenger in the petitioner-Corporation on 29.10.1976. It is vehemently contended that the application filed by respondent No.1 invoking the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is not maintainable as it was filed after a lapse of more than 29 years. However, without taking that aspect into consideration, the Labour Court has mechanically entertained and allowed the petition filed by respondent No.1. Therefore, learned counsel prays this Court to allow the present Writ Petition by setting aside the impugned order.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the similarly situated employees of the petitioner-Corporation approached this Court by filing W.P.No.8665 of 1995 and batch, which were allowed by this Court, vide common order dated

16.09.1999, directing the petitioner-Corporation to fix the pay anomaly. Further, in similar circumstances, this Court dismissed W.P.No.13069 of 2006, by order dated 20.06.2023, holding that the unofficial respondents therein (who were the employees of petitioner-Corporation) are also entitled to the benefit of G.O.(P).No.235 dated 17.09.1979 on par with other similarly situated employees. Pursuant to the said orders, the petitioner- Corporation had also extended the benefits to those employees. However, it is contended that petitioner-Corporation denied the claim of respondent No.1 only on the ground that he was not a party to the said Writ Petition. As such, the Labour Court, after considering the contentions of the respective parties and material evidence on record, has rightly allowed the aforesaid M.P. vide order dated 02.05.2006. Therefore, learned counsel prays this Court to dismiss the Writ Petition.

6. This Court has taken note of submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the material available on record.

7. Admittedly, respondent No.1 had been working as a Messenger in the petitioner-Corporation since 1976. While so, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.(P) No.235 dated 17.09.1979 extending Revised Pay Scales, 1978, to all the Gove