K. Maheswar Rao and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Considering the subject-matter of the writ petition, the status of the writ petitioners and the grounds averred in the application for condonation of delay, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in making and filing the appeal.

¶15

CAN/1/2024 is disposed of accordingly.

¶16

Appeal arises out of the order dated December

¶17

7, 2023 passed in WPA 21688 of 2023.

¶18

By the impugned order, learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition.

¶19

Learned advocate appearing for the appellants draws the attention of the Court to an order dated

¶20

Signed By : CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY High Court of Calcutta 22 nd of July 2024 03:01:21 PM

¶21

2

¶22

February 20, 2024 passed in MAT 214 of 2024, CAN 1 of 2024. He submits that, similarly situated and circumstanced writ petitioners approached the Writ Court and thereafter the Appeal Court in which the order dated February 20, 2024 was passed. He submits that, similar directions as that of paragraph6 and 7 thereof should be passed.

¶23

Learned Additional Solicitor General appears for the respondents.

¶24

In the writ petition, the appellants before us as writ petitioners sought for implementation of a report of the Assistant Labour Commissioner dated September 13, 2022 prepared on the basis of the directions of the Court dated December 20, 2021 passed in WPA 13736 of 2021. Several persons approached the Writ Court from time to time. One of such was a writ petition which was dismissed and the appeal therefrom was disposed of by the order dated February 20, 2024 passed in MAT 214 of 2024. 10. Learned Additional Solicitor General does not dispute the fact that, appellants before us are similarly situated and circumstanced with that of the appellants in MAT 214 of 2024.

¶25

In such circumstances, in order to avoid conflict of decisions, it would be appropriate to issue the same directions verbatim as that of MAT 214 of 2024.

¶26

3

¶27

Instead of immediately directing the present appellants to raise an industrial dispute based on the report of the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central, Kolkata) with the appropriate Government, we feel that having regard to their nature and length of engagement, a body may be constituted under the aegis of the Chairman, Railway Board for consideration of the grievances of the appellants along with the report dated September 13, 2022 in order to take a conscious decision keeping in mind the nature of labour legislation. 13. Under such circumstances, we modify the order passed by the learned Single Judge by requesting the Chairman, Railway Board, to constitute a committee within a period of three weeks from the date of communication of this order, who shall consider the grievances of the appellants along with the report prepared on September 13, 2022 after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants, who may be allowed to be represented by an Advocate, the Contractor and the Railway Department and dispose of the matter within a period of six weeks thereafter by a reasoned order, which shall be communicated to Mr. Anilendra Pandey, Advocate representing the present appellants, within two weeks from the date of said order.

¶28

4

¶29