The Executive Engineer Cum Administrative officer Vs K.C.Suguraman

When the appellant herein had imposed punishment of termination from service against the first respondent herein, the same came to be challenged by the workman before the Labour Court, Vellore, in I.D.No.21 of 2001.

¶28

In the Award passed by the Labour Court dated 24.04.2003, the Management was directed to reinstate the workman together with backwages and other attendant benefits. Pursuant to the award, the first respondent / workman had also filed a Computation Petition under Section 33-C(2) of the

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

WA No. 2563 of 2025

¶31

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The dues were also computed by the Labour Court and the Management had also paid the claim. For subsequent period of arrears, another Computation Petition was filed in C.P.No.256 of 2013, which amount was once again computed by the Labour Court on 18.05.2015. Since the Management had not come forward to make the payment computed wherein, the workman had filed an Execution Petition in E.P.No.5 of 2015. By an order dated 18.05.2015, the bank accounts of the appellant herein were attached in the execution proceedings, which order is under challenge in this Writ Appeal.

¶32

Incidentally, as against the original award in I.D.No.21 of 2021, dated 24.04.2003 of the Labour Court, the Management had preferred a Writ Petition in W.P.No.14549 of 2004, which was dismissed. As against the same, they had preferred a Writ Appeal in W.A.No.3079 of 2025 before this Court and the appeal came to be dismissed on 30.10.2025. Admittedly, the order passed in the Computation Petition in I.D.No.21 of 2001, has not been challenged by the Management till date. It is only the order passed in the Execution Proceedings, which is consequential to the amount computed in C.P.No.256 of 2013 is put under challenge.

¶33

We fail to understand as to how, when the award passed by the Labour Court has become final and the Management had not challenged the order passed in the consequential computation proceedings, can the resultant order passed in the Execution Proceedings be put to challenge. In this background, we

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

WA No. 2563 of 2025

¶36

do not find any valid ground to interfere with the order passed by the Writ Court. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶37

(M. S. RAMESH, J.) (R. SAKTHIVEL, J.) 05-11-2025

¶38

ASI

¶39

Index :Yes Speaking Order Internet :Yes Neutral Citation :Yes

¶40

To

¶41

1.K.C.Suguraman, S/o. Chinnasamy, No.20, 9th Street, Kumarappa Nagar, Katpadi, Vellore District.

¶42

2.The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Vellore.