Quashed

The Employers In Relation To The Management Of Damodar Valley Corporation v. Their Workmen Fulchand Saw

Jharkhand HC19 Aug 2019WPC/4883/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-judge bench quashed an award favoring a workman in a labor dispute and restored the matter to the Tribunal, citing the need to maintain parity following a remand of a coordinate bench's handling of a similar reference case.

What did the court decide?

The award dated 03.12.2013 in Reference No.61/2002 is quashed; the matter is restored to the Tribunal for fresh award.

The Employers In Relation To The Management… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P. (L) No.4883 of 2016

¶3

The Employers in relation to the management of Damodar Valley Corporation, Soil Conservation Department, Hazaribagh represented through Shri S.Beck (Sr. Manager DVC, Ranchi)

¶4

…… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Their Workmen Fulchand Saw …… Respondent

¶7

----CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ----- For the Petitioner :Mr.Srijit Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Chandra Shekhar Singh, Adv. For the Respondent :Mr. Prabhat Kr Sinha, Adv. Mr. Sumit Prakash, Adv. ----

¶8

08/Dated: 19/08/2019

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶10

The present writ petition has been filed against the award dated 03.12.2013 passed by the Presiding Officer, CGIT-I, Dhanbad in Reference No.61/2002 whereby the reference has been answered in favour of the workman wherein the management has been directed to allow the workman to work as he was previously working.

¶11

It appears that the workman has been working under the respondent as a Job Contract Workman. Subsequently, he was removed from the service and the work assigned to the Contractor. Altogether four Job Contract Workmen have been removed. Thereafter, industrial dispute has been raised, which has been referred vide Reference Nos.61/2002, 62/2002, 63/2002 and 64/2002. The terms of references were the same. All the above references have been answered in favour of the workman vide order dated 03.12.2013.

¶12

The present award has been assailed in W.P.(L) No.4910 of 2016 whereby the Reference No.62/2002 was involved and a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.10.2018 has remanded the reference in following terms:

¶13

“ Accordingly, the impugned award dated 03.12.2013, passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference Case no. 62 of 2002, is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad with a direction to pass a fresh award after hearing the arguments and

¶14

considering the evidences already led on behalf of both the sides as expeditious as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The parties shall not be permitted to adduce further evidence in the case. Both the sides shall cooperate the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad for disposal of the reference case within the aforesaid time frame.”

¶15

To maintain the parity, the present writ petition stands allowed. Award dated 03.12.2013 is, hereby, quashed.

¶16

The Reference Case No. 61/2002 is restored to its original file. Accordingly the present writ petition is disposed of in same terms as in the order dated 29.10.2018 passed in W.P.(L) No.4910 of 2016.

¶17

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶18

Shahid/

The Employers In Relation To The Management Of Damodar Valley Corporation v. Their Workmen Fulchand Saw

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Employers In Relation To The Management Of Damodar Valley Corporation v. Their Workmen Fulchand Saw

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Charitra Singh Vs Employers in Relation to the M

B.S.F.D.C. Vs P.O.Labour Court Ranchi And Ors.

Palamau Pramandal Khan Mazdoor Sangh Through Its President Satya Pal Varma Vs Union Of India Ministry Of Labour And Employment Through Its Secretary And Ors.

Project Officer/ AGENT,20/21 Pits Colliery of M S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Vs Dal Singhar Kohar

Surendra Ghatwar Vs Management of M/S Bokaro Steel

Sail, Bokaro Steel Plant through Its Senior Manager Legal John Tapan Kongari Vs Rajendra Paswan, Staff NO.2958