Disposed

Grob Tea Company and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 Apr 2024WP(C)/7788/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a Payment of Wages Act order due to the petitioner's consent to pay the awarded amounts. The court directed that statutory dues for a deceased worker be paid to her son upon proof of identity.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; working parties agreed to pay awarded amounts, directly payable to the deceased employee's son upon identification.

Grob Tea Company and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010028192015

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/7788/2015

¶5

GROB TEA COMPANY and ANR.

¶6

"HAUTTEE STREET", 9TH FLOOR 86 A, TOPSIA ROAD, KOLKATA- 700046.

¶7

2: TEENALI TEA ESTATE NAHARKATIA DIST. DIBRUGARH ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶10

REP. BY THE SECRETARY, LABOUR DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF ASSAM,

¶11

2:ASSAM CHA KARMACHARI SANGHA REP. BY THE CIRCLE SECRETARY NAHARKATIA CIRCLE

¶12

P.O. NAHARKATIA A.C.K.S. CENTRAL OFFICE "BIJOY BHAWAN" DIBRUGARH ASSAM.

¶13

3:LABOUR COMMISSIONER GUWAHATI.

¶14

4:ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER-CUM- AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT 1947 DIBRUGARH

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.R HAZARIKA

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : MRS.A BHATTACHARYYAR-2

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 02.04.2024

¶21

Heard Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. A. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2, Assam Cha Karmachari Sangha.

¶22

The challenge in this writ petition is to the legality and validity of the order dated 12.11.2015 passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner -cum- Authority under Payment of Wages Act, 1936, Dibrugarh, directing the petitioner to pay a total amount of Rs. 59,213.92 to three employees of the tea estate belonging to the petitioner tea company in the following proportion:-

¶23

“Amount to be paid to the respective employees is detailed below:-

¶24

Sri Dhoni Ram Gogoi, Teenali Tea Estate, P.O. Naharkatia, Dibrugarh.

¶25

Rs. 39724.00 (Rs. Thirty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty Four) Only

¶26

Sri Jiban Chandra Dutta, Teenali Tea Estate, P.O. Naharkatia, Dibrugarh.

¶27

Rs. 1982.40 (Rupees One Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Two and Forty paise) Only.

¶28

Smti Sanlata Baruah, Teenali Tea Estate, P.O. Naharkatia, Dibrugarh.

¶29

Rs. 17507.52 (Rupees Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Seven and Fifty Two Paisa) Only.”

¶30

Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Sri Dhani Ram Gogoi has been paid Rs. 39,724/-, while Sri Jiban Chandra Dutta has been paid Rs. 1982.40. He submits that Smt. Sanlata Baruah could not be paid the amount of Rs. 17,507.52, on account of the said lady having died on 02.11.2014.

¶31

Page No.# 3/3

¶32

Mrs. A. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that late Sanlata Baruah has got a son, namely, Mridul Das to whom the payable amount can be paid.

¶33

Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as and when Mr. Mridul Das approaches the petitioners with proper identification and proves that he is the son of late Sanlata Baruah, the aforesaid payable amount shall be paid to the said person.

¶34

Mrs. A. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 agrees that no further claim will be made in respect of the payment to be made by the petitioners.

¶35

In view of the present case being disposed of, on account of the petitioners having agreed to pay the three workmen the amount, as stated above, the other issues, which have been put to challenge by way of this writ petition, has not been decided as per the consent of the counsels for the parties.

¶36

It is needless to add that as and when Mr. Mridul Das, son of late Sanlata Baruah appears with all identity proof, certificates, etc., the money payable should be paid to him immediately.

¶37

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

Grob Tea Company and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Grob Tea Company and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranglal Mandal Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

M/S Daisy Industries Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Shahida Ahmad Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Pulin Gogoi Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Bishwaraj Purkayastha Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Radha Madhab Self Help Group and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.