Disposed

Raghbir Singh v. Cement Corporation of India Ltd. & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Apr 2012CWP/7831/1997

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition by an employee seeking directions to implement a Supreme Court judgment that modified a Labour Court award. The Court directed the petitioner to approach the Labour Court under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act to secure the amounts due.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach the Labour Court under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act to secure amounts due.

Raghbir Singh Vs Cement Corporation… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

C.W.P. No.7831 of 1997

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

C.W.P. No.7831 of 1997 Date of Decision. 23.04.2012

¶5

Raghbir Singh s/o Nathu Ram, resident of village Kaliwas, Tehsil and District Rohtak

¶6

.......Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Cement Corporation of India Ltd. and another

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Present: None for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. H.N. Mehtani, Advocate for respondent No.1.

¶12

Mr. S.K. Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶13

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

¶14

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No

¶15

To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No

¶16

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No

¶17

-.-

¶18

K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)

¶19

The writ petition is at the instance of an employee for the 1^st respondent-Corporation, who seeks for a direction to comply with the award of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court passed on 23.11.1994. This award was the subject of challenge before the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5058 of 1997 and Division Bench of this Court had directed the matter to be brought for hearing subsequent to the disposal of the appeal before the Supreme Court. The copy of the judgment is brought to file by the registry and posted for final hearing today. There is no representation for the petitioner and I proceeded to dispose of the case on the basis of the judgment given by the Supreme Court. While modifying the award passed by the Labour Court, the

¶20

-2-

¶21

C.W.P. No.7831 of 1997

¶22

Supreme Court has directed that the respondent would be entitled to backwages for the period of two years from 01.02.1992 to 30.01.1994 and the Supreme Court has also directed that he would not be entitled to any interest and the amount due to him should be paid within a period of three months from today.

¶23

The order further contains a clause that if the payment is not made within the time stipulated, the petitioner would be entitled to 18% interest per annum. The decision of the Supreme Court finally has adjudicated in the rights of parties and the petitioner's entitlement will, therefore, be seen in the light of the supreme court judgment. The petitioner will be entitled to secure the amounts due to him as per the decision if the amount has not already been paid by approaching the Labour Court under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

¶24

The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms.

¶25

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE

¶26

April 23, 2012 Pankaj*

Raghbir Singh v. Cement Corporation of India Ltd. & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghbir Singh v. Cement Corporation of India Ltd. & Anr.

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

Sumeet Sofat Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Bharat Singh Vs Financial Commissioner (a) and Ors.

Yog Raj Karan Singh & Ors. Vs Ashok Kumar

Gurcharan Singh Handa Vs Managing Director, H.S.M.I.C.

Amit Masih and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Harvinder Singh Vs Financial Commissioner, Hry., Chd. & Ors.