Writ petition allowing quashing of Labour Court award granting interest on delayed leave encashment. Court held claim lacks pre-existing right basis and lacks industrial adjudication.
Impugned order of Labour Court dated 07/03/2023 set aside. Respondent to avail other remedies as advised in law.
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.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14783 WP No. 104464 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 104464 OF 2023 (S-KSRTC)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGEMENT OF NWKRTC DHARWAD DIVISION, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, DIVISION DHARWAD, REPTD. BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER CENTRAL OFFICE, HUBLI, PIN-580001.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VEENA HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR
SHRI G. PRAKASHMURTHY S/O. GANGADARAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION RETD. ARTISAN, R/O. H. NO.57, PRASANNA COLONY, BASAVESHWAR NAGAR, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580001.
…RESPONDENT
Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2023.12.22 12:55:42 +0530
(BY SHRI G. PRAKASHMURTHY S/O. GANGADARAPPA-RESPONDENT)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER INCLUDING THE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE AWARD DATED 07/03/2023 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, HUBLI IN APP-NO. 54/2022 COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner in this petition is questioning the order passed by the Labour Court, Hubballi, under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the I.D.Act, 1947’, for short).
the petitioner-Corporation. After attaining the age of superannuation, the respondent-employee has received the service benefits payable to him. Respondent approached the Labour Court under Section 33-C(2) of the I.D.Act, 1947 with a prayer to award interest on the delayed payment of statutory benefits.
and the Labour Court has allowed the claim petition and granted interest at the rate of 8% per annum for the delayed period in making the payment of leave encashment.
petitioner-Corporation is before this Court.
interest in respect of delayed payment of leave encashment.
iv) The terms of employment between the employer and employees does not contemplate the payment of interest to the employees in case of delayed payment of service benefits, as such, under Section 33-C(2) of the I.D. Act, 1947, the Labour Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a claim petition without there being any adjudication as to the entitlement of the employee.
i) The relation between the petitioner and respondent as an employer and employee is not in dispute. The date on which the respondent-employee is entitled to receive the leave encashment benefit is also fixed in terms of the circular dated 09.07.1998, wherein the employer has an obligation to make payment of leave encashment on the date of attaining the age of superannuation.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14783 WP No. 104464 of 2023
This being the position, there is nothing to be adjudicated by the Industrial Tribunal as contemplated under the I.D. Act, 1947 and since no adjudication is required relating to payment of interest, the proceedings under Section 33-C(2) of the I.D. Act, 1947 is maintainable.
for respondent-employee would also refer to the Judgments referred to by the Labour Court in the impugned order.
the petitioner-Corporation by way of reply would refer to the
judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bombay Chemical Industries vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner and Another, reported in (2022) 5 SCC 629 and the Judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of The Management of NWKRTC vs. Shri Nijauni S/o. Shivarudrappa Devanur, Writ Petition No. 103872/2021 (L-KSRTC), disposed on 05.01.2023.
the bar.
payment of interest on delayed service benefits. The Rules and Regulations governing the service conditions between the employer and employee also do not contemplate the payment of interest in case of delay in paying the interest to the employee.
ORDER
C(2) of the I.D. Act, 1947.
Sd/JUDGE
gab/ct-bn List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33
3 issues framed by the court
Whether theLabour Court has jurisdiction under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to entertain a claim for interest on delayed service benefits.
Whether the claim for interest on delayed payment constitutes a pre-existing right or benefit under the I.D. Act.
Whether the claim for interest was maintainable given the absence of adjudication by the Industrial Tribunal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bombay Chemical Industries vs. Deputy Labour CommissionerReferred¶48
(2022) 5 SCC 629 · Who else cites this
The Management of NWKRTC vs. Shri Nijauni S/o. Shivarudrappa DevanurReferred¶48
The Management of NWKRTC vs. Shri Nijauni S/o. Shivarudrappa Devanur, Writ Petition No. 103872/2021 (L-KSRTC)
Union of India and another vs. KankubenRelied on¶52
(2006) 9 SCC 292 · Who else cites this
Judgment of the Delhi High CourtDistinguished¶63
2 provisions across 2 enactments
THE MANAGEMENT OF NWKRTC DHARWAD DIVISION
MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR
SHRI G. PRAKASHMURTHY
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
