HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writs No. 25866/2018

1.

Jaipur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Through

M.D./chairman, Near Vidhan Sabha, Vidhyut Bhawan,

Jaipur.

2.

Assistant Engineer, Jaipur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited,

L.t.b.ii, Chomu House, Jaipur.

----Petitioners

Versus

Vidhyut Shramik Karamchari Akta Union (Citu), Jaipur District,

Jaipur Through Secretary, Mazdoor Bhawan, Hatwara Road,

Jaipur.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Ms. Priya Pareek and Mr. Sandeep

Singh Shekhawat

For Respondent(s)

:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Order

05/12/2018

1.

The petitioners, by way of this writ petition, assail the award

dated 21.02.2018 passed by the Judge, Industrial Disputes

Tribunal, Jaipur whereby the workman- Govind Ram has been

directed to be granted benefits of the pay scale of Carpenter w.e.f.

03.04.1981 and also given the consequential revised pay scale of

Carpenter and released the arrears accordingly.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

workman- Govind Ram had been regularized on the post of Helper

Grade-II as he was unskilled labourer in terms of Singh Sancheti

Award. Accordingly, learned counsel submits that the award

passed by the Tribunal could not have been ordered as there was

(2 of 3)

[CW-25866/2018]

no post specified as Carpenter and as per the Technical Workman

Service Regulations, 1975, in the skilled category only those

workmen should be fixed who were initially appointed on the

same. Learned counsel has relied on the judgment passed in the

case of RSEB Vs. Naval Kishore in Civil Appeal no.5193/2003

decided on 10/11/2009, wherein the Supreme Court held that the

Court should not fix pay scale as fixation of pay scales is a

complicated exercise which has financial implications and

cascading effect. It is for the concerned authorities to fix the pay

scales and not for judges. Learned counsel for the petitioners

submits that the workman Govind Ram was rightly fixed in the pay

scale of Helper Grade-II and further promoted on the post of

Helper Grade-I.

3.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

examined the submissions raised before this court. In the light of

the judgment passed by the Judge, Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur, this

Court finds that the Industrial Tribunal possesses powers under

the Industrial Disputes Act to examine the case relating to a

dispute in relation to the pay scale to which workman is entitled.

The Industrial Tribunal has, after examining the facts of the case

and relying upon the evidence of both the workman as well as the

representatives of the petitioners, reached to the conclusion that

in cross-examination Assistant Engineer of JVVNL admitted to the

fact that the initial appointment of the workman was on the post

of Carpenter which is explicit from the service record showing him

as a Carpenter. Keeping in view the same, the Judge, Industrial

Tribunal has proceeded to notice that all the Carpenters who were

initially appointed were regularized on the said post in terms of

(3 of 3)

[CW-25866/2018]

Singh Sancheti Award, while the workman was appointed as

Helper Grade-II.

4.

In view of the fact that the petitioners have themselves

mentioned at several places including the letters sent to the

Labour Commissioner of the petitioner that workman having been

appointed as Carpenter on 08.02.1979. The Industrial Tribunal has

reached to the conclusion that the workman-Govind Ram was

entitled to be treated as a Carpenter w.e.f. 08.02.1979 on daily

wages and in terms of Singh Sancheti Award dated 15.06.1979,

he was, therefore, entitled to be regularized on the post of

Carpenter w.e.f. 01.04.1981. The contention of the learned

counsel with regard to there being two grades namely Carpenter

Grade-I and Carpenter Grade II under the Regula