Cement Corp. of India Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal Labour Court, 2002(1) SCT 355, this Court has held that if a workman's right to receive benefit is disputed that may be determined by the Labour Court before proceeding to compute the benefit under Section 33-C(2). In this case, the petitioner corporation was denying the relationship of the workman. The court has further observed in this case that the labour Court has a jurisdiction to interfere with the settlement and award while proceeding with the application under Section 33-C(2). In Bhakra Beas Management Board, Chandigarh Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Labour Court, Chandigarh and others, 2004(3) RSJ 777, Division Bench of this court has viewed that computation of wages on the basis of rule, order or instructions does not amount to adjudication, but fall within the scope of existing right. Finally, the counsel has referred to Prithvi Singh Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Govt., Ind. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chd., 1995(2) PLR 516 to point out that computation of benefit in terms of the money and determination of existence of a claim and holding of an enquiry and incidental enquiry for such determination fall within the scope of Section 33-C(2). It is also observed that jurisdiction is not barred only because the claim is disputed by the Management even if it was a case of lay-off or closure.
