State engineering officials challenged a common Industrial Tribunal award under Section 33(C)(2) directing payment to workmen; the Government Pleader reported the award had been implemented and sought withdrawal.
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 :: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION Nos. 38870, 38657.38868.38961 AND 41923 OF 2015 WRIT PETITION NO: 38870.OF 201^ ' ^ Between:
...PETITIONERS/
RESPONDENTS in M.P.No.7/1995
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 a Writ order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI calling for all records to the order dated 28.08.2014 in M.P.No.7/1995 on the file of Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Anantapuramu and quash the same is as illegal and contrary to Sec 33 ( C)2 of the Industrial Disputes Act.
2
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 50050 OF 2015)
Counsel for the Petitioners: GP FOR IRRIGATION AND CAD Counsel for the Respondent No.1: NONE APPEARED Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR LABOUR
WRIT PETITION NO: 38657 OF 2015 Between:
...PETITIONERS/ RESPONDENTS in M.P. No.6/1995
AND
...RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT in M.P.No.6/1995
...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 a Writ order or direction in thenatureofCERTIORARI
3
calling for all records to the order dated 28.08.2014in M.P.No.6/1995 on the file of Chairpersoncum-Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Anantapuramu and quash the same is as illegal and contrary to Sec 33 ( C)2 of the Industrial Disputes Act.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 49756 OF 2015)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the order dated 28.08.2014 in MP.No.6 of 1995 on the file of Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, IndustrialTribunal'^umLabour Court, Anantapuram pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: GP FOR IRRIGATION AND CAD ,
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI B. BHASKAR REDDY,
representing SRI P. RAGHAVENDRA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR LABOUR
WRIT PETITION NO: 38868 OF 2015
Between:
...PETITIONERS/ RESPONDENTS In M.P. No.4/1995
AND
...RESPONDENT/
RESPONDENT in M.P. No.4/1995
...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 a Writ order or direction in thenatureofCERTIORARI calling for all records to the order dated 28.08.2014inM.P.No.4/1995onthe file of Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Anantapuramu and quash the same is as illegalandcontrarytoSec 33 ( C)2 of the Industrial Disputes Act. .,-
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 50047 OF 2015)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the order dated 28.08.2014 in MP.No.4of1995onthe file of Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, IndustrialTribunal(iumLabour Court, Anantapuram pending disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioners: GP FOR IRRIGATION ANDCAD Counsel for the Respondent No.1: NONE APPEARED Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR LABOUR
WRIT PETITION NO: 38961 OF 2015"
Between:
...PETITIONERS/
RESPONDENTS in M.P. No.1/1995
AND
...RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT in M.P. No.1/1995
...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 a Writ order or direction in thenatureofCERTIORARI calling for ail records to the order dated 28.08.2014inM.P.No.1/1995onthe file of Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Anantapuramu and quash the same is asJIlegal and contrary to Sec 33 ( C)2 of the Industrial Disputes Act.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 50211 OF 2015)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the order dated 28.08.2014 in MP.No.1 of 1995 on the file of Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, IndustrialTribunalCum Labour Court, Anantapuram pending disposal of the writ petition." Counsel for the Petitioners: GP FOR IRRIGATION AND CAD Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI B. BHASKAR REDDY,
representing SRI P. RAGHAVENDRA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR LABOUR
WRIT PETITION NO: 41923 OF 2015
Between:
c
...PETITIONERS/
RESPONDENTS in l/I.P.No.3/1995
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,theHighCourtmay be pleased to issue a Writ order or direction in thenatureofCERTIORARI records to the order dated 28.08.2014 in M.P No.3 of1995on calling for all the file of Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Anantapuramu and quash the same is as illegalandcontrary to Sec 33(C) 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2Q15(WPMP. NO: 53304 OF 2015)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,theHighCourtmaybe pleased to suspend the order dated 28.08.2014 In MPNo.3of1995onthe file of Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, IndustrialTribunalCumLabour Court, Anantapuram pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: GP FOR IRRIGATION ANDCAD Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI B. BHASKAR REDDY, representing SRI P. RAGHAVENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR LABOUR
The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER
I
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 38657. 38868. 38961 and 41923 of 201^ WRIT PETITION NOs: 38870.
r.nMMON ORDER:
All these petitions are filed by the same petitionerschallengingcommon Industrial Tribunal order passed by the Chairperson-cum-Presiding Officer, cum Labour Court, Anantapuram in M.P.Nos.1, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of 1995, on 28. 08.2014. Therefore, I am of the view that it is appropriate to decide ali the petitions by common order.
The petitioners herein are respondents in the impugned common order order, the labour court has dated 28.08.2014. In the impugned common passed an order as under;
allowed and the Respondents 1 to 3 are 13) In the result, all the Petitions are partly of Rs.2,24,110-75ps, the directed to pay the 2"“ Petitioner in M.P.No.3/95 a sum of Rs.1,99,966-35ps, the Petitioner inin M.P.No.4/95 a Petitioner in M.P.No.1/95 a sum sum ofRs.2,14.393-85ps., the Petitioner in M.P.No.5/95 a sum of Rs.1.82,097-20ps, the 86,690/- and the Petitioner in M.P.No.7/95 a sum Petitioner in M.P.No.6/95 a sum of Rs.1 the date of this Order, failing which the same of Rs.1,86,690/- within one month from the date of this order till the date of shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from realisation.
aforesaid order, the present writ petitions have been Aggrieved by the
filed.
Heard learned Government Pleader for l&CAD and learned Government
Pleader for Labour.
/
Today, when these writ petitions came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader has produced a copy of letter addressed by the Assistant Engineer, SRBC Division-3, SRBC Camp Colony, Nandyal, vide Lr.No.AE/SRBC-l/SRBC-DN-3/NDL/1AE,NDL, dated 22.08.2024, wherein it ISi stated that the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Anantapur on 28.08.2014 were implemented by the Executive Engineer (petitioner No.3) SRBC Division-3, Nandyal. As such, learned Government Pleader sought permission of this Court to withdraw these writ petitions.
Permission as sought for is accorded.
Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in these writ petitions, shall stand closed.
Sd/- V.DIWAKAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SEC N OFFICER
To,
ssb
high court
DATED:22/08/2024
COMMON ORDER
WP.Nos .38870, 38657, 38868, 38961 and 41923 of 2015
^ "'A
'x 2 1 NOV 202^1 3)
^ , Current Section
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITIONS AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS
3 provisions across 3 enactments
The Chief Engineer (P), Srisailam Project
The Superintending Engineer, Srisailam Project
The Executive Engineer, Division No.4, Srisailam Right Bank Canal
A. Pratap
S. Veerabhadrappa
Y. Jammulaiah
V.SUJATHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
