High Court of Madras dismissed Writ Petition challenging Additional Labour Court's order rejecting petitioner's claim for 14 years' arrears of salary, finding petitioner failed to prove annual increment or due amount despite 17-year delay.
Writ Petition dismissed. No costs.
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.
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.07.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
B.B.Joghee ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Management, Hatari Tea Industries, Ithalar, Nilgiris - 643 004. ... Respondent
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in connection with the order passed by the Learned Additional Labour Court, Coimbatore in C.P.No.134 of 2009 dated 05.06.2018 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent to disburse the arrears of salary of Rs.1,02,000/- with interest to the petitioner as prayed for in his Computation Petition No.134 of 2009.
1/8
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sivakumar
For Respondent : No Appearance
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records in
connection with the order passed by the Learned Additional Labour Judge, Coimbatore in C.P.No.134 of 2009 dated 05.06.2018 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent to disburse the arrears of salary of Rs.1,02,000/- with interest to the petitioner as prayed for in his Computation Petition No.134 of 2009.
2/8
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
respondent denied the very employment and employee - employer
relationship and took up the plea that he was allotted only consultant work, to look after the accounts and to submit the statements before the Authorities and the alleged appointment order was a fabricated one. During the enquiry, the petitioner was examined as WW1 and Exs.W1 to W24 were marked on the petitioner's side. MW1 was examined and Ex.M1 was marked on the respondent's side. After hearing the matter in full, the Learned Presiding Officer, Additional Labour Court, Coimbatore was pleased to dismiss the Computation Petition on 05.06.2018. Against which, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
that the order passed by the Learned Additional Labour Judge, Coimbatore, is against law and principle of natural justice. Therefore, it has to be set aside in limini. He would further submit that the Learned Additional Labour Judge has come to a decision that Ex.W-1 is not true and genuine one and thereby held that there was no pre-existing right as contemplated under Section 22(c)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The said finding is factually not correct on the ground that the
3/8
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
Ex.M-1 was marked through the petitioner while he was cross examined. The Ex.W-1 is the typed one and Ex.M1 is a hand written one. The content of both the documents are one and the same. The Ex.M-1 document was under the custody of the Management and the Management alone has produced the same before the Trial Court. Therefore, the appointment order viz. Ex.W-1 and Ex-M-1 has to be taken as a proved document. In such circumstances, the findings of the Learned Additional Labour Judge is illegal, unlawful and and the same is against the proved fact.
the Learned Additional Labour Judge has come to decision that the continuous service of the petitioner for a period of 14 years is not proved. Such findings is against law and fact. The Management has failed to produce certain vital documents such as Attendance Register, Wage Disbursement Register etc. in spite of call for the documents by the petitioner. The adverse interference has to be drawn only in favour of the petitioner and the Learned Additional Labour Judge took the adverse interference against the petitioner and the same is against law and settled
4/8
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
legal position of law of presumption.
and the petitioner has misused the blank letter head containing the signature of the respondent which was given for the purpose of submitting accounts before the concerned office. The respondent has
5/8
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
further alleged that, only at the age of 55, the petitioner approached them to look after account works and he was given seasonal employment only on humanitarian grounds. It was also alleged by the respondent that it is totally false that the petitioner was paid monthly salary and that a some of Rs.1,02,000/- is due to him towards arrears of wages and no amount has to be paid by the respondent to the petitioner legally.
6/8
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
the salary alleged was paid.
20.07.2023
raja
7/8
Index : yes/no Internet : yes/no
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN.J.,
raja
To The Additional Labour Court, Coimbatore
W.P.No.5629 of 2019
20.07.2023
8/8
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to set aside the Additional Labour Court's dismissal of the computation petition on grounds of natural justice or illegal findings regarding the appointment order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B.B.Joghee
The Management, Hatari Tea Industries
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
