The petitioner, the Executive Engineer, challenged the Labour Court's award granting back wages to a deceased workman. The Court noted the deceased was entitled to wages up to reinstatement and dismissed the writ petition without interference.
The writ petition was dismissed. No order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY. THE TWENTIETH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
I
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SIWT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 8369 OF 2015
Between:
The Executive Engineer, Vamsadhara (BRR) Project. Maintenance Division. Narasannapeta, Srikakulam District.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, and quash the same by setting aside the order dated 23.04.2012 in MP No.2/2011 in ID.No.48/92 on the file of the Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Srikakulam.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WVMP. NO: 1573 OF 20151
Between:
Deverasetti Bhujanga Rao, S/o. Venkatanarayana. R/o. Julumuru Village, Post & Mandal, Srikakulam District
5’’'= "’® circumstances stated in vacate^ thV petition, the High Court may be pleased To r. K. interim suspension dt. 31.3.2015 oassed in Vy.P.M.P.No.11029 of 2015 in W.P.No. 8369 of 2015.
I.A. NO: 2 OF 2015fWPMP. NO: 11029 OF 2015)
”'■^'''"9 "i® circumstances stated in Itau •i’® petition, the High Court may be pleased to ?n tho thP^u®®®.?'."®,® T “P No.2/2011 in ID No.48/92 dated 23.04.2012 a£ove wfh pe^fion ** P®"'""® ‘he
Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR IRRIGATION & CAD
Counsel for the Respondents 1,3 to 5: SRI V. SUDHAKAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent 2: GP FOR LABOUR
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V. SUJATHA
Writ Petition Wo.8369 of 201 S
ORDER:
The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
qpprqp^•a^e writ, order or direction more and quash the ' M.P.No.2/2011mpm in ID No.48/1992 on the Jiie 23.04.2012of the Hon’blein Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Srikakulam ”
2. The case of-the petitioner is that, the petitioner being the Executive Engineer. Vamsadhara Project, has filed the present writ petition challenging the award passed by the Labour Court in M.P.No.2 of 2011 dated 23.04.2012 wherein the petitioner was directed to pay the wages to the 1st respondent herein from 16.02.1997 to 04.02.2009.
2
was published on 16.12.1996 and the period prescribed for implementation has expired on 16.02.1997.
5. Thereafter, the 1” respondent herein was reinstated on 04.02.2009 and as the 1« respondent herein was entitled to receive the wages from 16.02.1997 to 04.02.2009, to an amount of Rs.3,97,888/- towards the wages due to failure on the part of the petitioner management to reinstate him fmm 16.02.1997 till the date of reinstatement i.e.,04.02.2009, the 1« respondent herein has filed M.P.NO.2 of 2011 before the Industrial Tribunal-cumLabour Court, Visakhapatnam, which was allowed vide order dated 23.04.2012, wherein, the following order was passed;
3
order. In case the management failed to pay the
Seaen Paise Onlyj.wdhin the stipulated time the workman
1
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Labourand Mr.V.Sudhaka r Reddy, ■earned counsel for the respondents 1, 3, 4 & 5 ’ o, & 5 and perused the material placed on record.
4
no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, in this Writ Petition
shall stand closed.
SD/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER
//TRUE COPY//
To, 1. Industrial Tribunal-cum-labour Court, Visakhapatnam. 2. Two CCS to GP for Irrigation & CAD. High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUTl 3. One CC to Sri. V. Sudhakar Reddy Advocate [OPUC] 4. p*/?TwoCCstoCCs to (GP for Labour, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies Sdkr
HIGH COURT
DATE0:20/04/2023
ORDER
WP.No.8369 of 2015
<27
I 3 AUb 2023 k
, Current Section
DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS
L
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the order of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court awarding back wages.
If the Legal Heir is no more, should the Court disturb the award passing on the deceased workman.
Whether Article 226 of the Constitution warrants interference with the clear statutory award.
The Executive Engineer, Vamsadhara (BRR) Project
Deverasetti Bhujanga Rao (Deceased)
Industrial Tribunal-cum-labour Court, Visakhapatnam
Devarasetty Sumathi
Devarasetty Kameswara Rao
Gedela Sandhya Rani
V. SUJATHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
