Dismissed

Sri Krishnan a P v. the National Textile Corporation Limited

Karnataka HC17 Nov 2023WP/42323/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Industrial Tribunal awarded enhanced pay scales to a trade union in 2001, confirmed by courts till 2014. Individual petitioners, not union members, filed Writ Petition under Article 226 seeking those benefits despite being covered under a 1995 settlement. Court held remedies not exhausted and dismissed petition.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners held not entitled to pay-scale benefits; Writ Petition dismissed with no direction to implement Industrial Tribunal award.

Sri Krishnan a P Vs the National Textile… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:41012 WP No. 42323 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.42323 OF 2017 (L-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI KRISHNAN A.P., AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O KANARAKUTTY A.P., MANAGER, NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION SHOWROOM, KANNUR, R/O SHREESHYLAM, NAMBIYATTIL HOUSE, KARIMPAPOIL, NADUVANNUR POST, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶10

Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI T., AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, W/O KUNHI KANNAN K., SALES MANAGER, NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION SHOWROOM, KANNUR, R/O NANDANAM, KOONAM ROAD, POST KUOUMATHUR(VIA), KARIMBAM, TALIPARRAMBA, KANNUR.

¶12

SRI PANKAJAKSHAN PILLAI AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O R.KRISHNA PILLAI, SINCE DEAD BY LR'S.

¶13

3(a) SMT. RADHAMANI AMMA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O LATE PANKAJAKSHAN PILLAI,

¶14

3(b) SMT. ANUPAMA P.R. AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, D/O LATE PANKAJAKSHAN PILLAI,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC:41012 WP No. 42323 of 2017

¶17

3(c) SRI. ANOOPKUMAR P. AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, S/O LATE PANKAJAKSHAN PILLAI,

¶18

ALL ARE R/AT MUNDEZHATHU VEEDU, SAKTHIKULANGARA P.O. KOLLAM - 691 581.

¶19

…PETITIONERS

¶20

(BY SRI. K.C.SHANTHAKUMAR., ADVOCATE)

¶21

AND:

¶22

THE NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION LIMITED, (A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING) CORE IV SCOPE COMPLEX, 7, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110 003, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶23

THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER(MKTG), NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION LIMITED, RETAIL MARKETING DIVISION, NTC HOUSE, POST BOX NO.2409, 35-B SOMASUNDARAM MILLS ROAD, COIMBATORE - 641 009.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI.SUBRAHAMANYA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.B.C.PRABHAKAR., ADVOCATE)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:41012 WP No. 42323 of 2017

¶29

ORDER

¶30

Sri.Shantakumar.K.C., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Subramanya., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.B.C.Prabhakar., for respondents 1 & 2 have appeared in person.

¶31

The petitioners have sought a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to implement the award dated:20.07.2001 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru in I.D.No.31/1995, duly confirmed by this Court and also by the Apex Court expeditiously and without loss of time, making available to the petitioners all the financial benefits flowing from the said award.

¶32

The petition averments are these:

¶33

On 20.08.1994, the National Textile Showroom Employees Association raised a Charter of Demand; on 25.11.1994, notice was issued to the respondent to implement the demand. However, the same resulted in an Industrial Dispute. The Government of Karnataka referred the dispute to

¶34

the Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru. The Industrial Tribunal passed an award on 20.07.2001 allowing the dispute raised by

¶35

¶36

NC: 2023:KHC:41012 WP No. 42323 of 2017

¶37

the Union and held that the first party employees are entitled for the pay-scale as per IV Pay Commission Scale or NTC scales on par with employees of the Divisional Office of the second party. The said award was challenged by the respondent Management before this Court in W.P.No.6505/2002. The said petition came to be dismissed by an order dated:12.07.2006 confirming the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The order passed in Writ Petition was challenged before the Division Bench in W.A.No.1359/2006. The Writ Appeal was also dismissed vide order dated:21.03.2007. The order passed by the Division Bench was assailed before the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.6036-6037/2009 and that was also dismissed by an order dated:24.09.2014. The respondents filed a Review Petition in No.797-798/2015, which was also dismissed. On 07.05.2017, the first petitioner - Krishnan.A.P made a representation to extend the IDA Pay scale. The petitioners have filed the captioned Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents have urged several contentions. Heard, the

¶39

¶40

NC: 2023:KHC:41012 WP No. 42323 of 2017

¶41

contentions urged on behalf of the respective parties and perused the Writ papers with utmost care.

¶42

The principal contention of the petitioners is for implementation of the award dated:20.07.2001 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru in I.D.No.31/1995.

¶43

Suffice it to note that the General Secretary, National Textile Corporation Showrooms Employees Association, a registered Trade Union raised a dispute and Government of Karnataka referred the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru. The Industrial Tribunal passed an award on 20.07.2001 allowing the dispute raised by the Union and held that the first party employees are entitled for the pay-scale as per IV Pay Commission Scale or NTC scales on par with employees of the Divisional Office of the second party. The said award was challenged by the respondent Management before this Court in W.P.No.6505/2002. The said petition came to be dismissed by an order dated:12.07.2006 confirming the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The order passed in Writ Petition was challenged before the Division Bench in W.A.No.1359/2006. The Writ Appeal was also dismissed vide

¶44

¶45

NC: 2023:KHC:41012 WP No. 42323 of 2017

¶46

order dated:21.03.2007. The order passed by the Division Bench was assailed before the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.6036-6037/2009 and that was also dismissed by an order dated:24.09.2014. The respondents filed a Review Petition in No.797-798/2015, which was also dismissed.

¶47

It is pivotal to note that the present petitioners have not approached the Government for reference nor any Industrial Dispute raised as has been done in the earlier Union. Hence, without exhausting remedy as available in the Industrial Disputes Act or in any other law, the petitioners cannot straight away invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶48

The present petitioners are not members of the registered trade union which has raised Industrial Dispute and obtained an award that has been confirmed by the Apex Court. Since the workmen involved in the said proceedings and the employees involved in the present Writ Petition are entirely different, hence non-extending benefits as has been extended to the members of earlier Union as per the award dated:20.07.2001 would not amount to violation of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Further, the present petitioners were

¶49

¶50

NC: 2023:KHC:41012 WP No. 42323 of 2017

¶51

covered under Settlement under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act dated:17.11.1995. Therefore, it cannot be construed that there is a violation of order or award passed by the Tribunal, this Court or by the Apex Court. The petitioners are not entitled to the pay-scale. The petitioners cannot invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶52

For the reasons stated above, the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and it is liable to be dismissed.

¶53

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed .

¶54

Sd/JUDGE

¶55

TKN/MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16.1.

Sri Krishnan a P v. the National Textile Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Krishnan a P v. the National Textile Corporation Limited

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

V M Ravindra Vs the Assistant General Manager I/a

Karnataka State Road Vs T P Harshanarayana

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs C D Ramaiah

Sri. G. S. Subramanian Vs the National Textile Corporation Limited

Sri C Ravikumar Vs the National Textile Corporation Limited

M/S Essillor Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs the President