The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Andhra Pradesh Foods challenging a Labour Court award of reinstatement and partial back wages (Rs.150/month) for an employee terminated in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act.
Writ petition dismissed; no costs awarded.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY
WRIT PETITION NO: 3364 of 1995
Between:
The Managing Director Andhra Pradesh Foods, Nacharam, I.D.A.; Hyderabad - 501 507.
... PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate order or direction particularly one in nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the Award dated 30.8.1994 in I.D.No. 754/93 on the file of the Labour Court-III, Hyderabad and quash the same is as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction to the extent of directing the petitioner herein to pay the compensation of Rs.150/- per month during the unemployment period of the Respondent No.2 herein.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR G.CHANDRAIAH
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: MR.S.RAVINDRANATH
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: G.P. for Labour
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed by the management of A.P. Foods, Nacharam, assailing the award of the Labour Court Hyderabad in I.D.No.754/93 dated 30-08-1994. Second respondent raised a dispute with regard to the termination of service under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short ‘the Act’). The said dispute was numbered as I.D.No.754/93. Evidence was let in by the management as well as the workman. Taking into consideration the evidence available on record, the labour Court found that there was violation of Section 25-F of the Act; accordingly directed reinstatement of the petitioner with back wages at the rate of Rs.150/- per month for the period of unemployment. Against the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that awarding back wages at the rate of Rs.150/- per month is only illegal and arbitrary and the workman has not established that he was unemployed for the period in question. I am afraid I cannot accept this contention. The Tribunal having found that there is violation of Section 25-F of the Act, granted the relief of reinstatement with back wages at the rate of Rs.150/- per month, not full back wages, but only partial back wages at the rate of Rs.150/- was granted. Thus, I do not see any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the lower Court.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
G. BIKSHAPATHY, J
November 18, 2004
MRR/TS
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
// TRUE COPY //
SECTION OFFICER
To:
1 Presiding Officer, Labour Court-III, Hyderabad. 2 Two C.C. s to the G.P. for Labour, High Court Buildings, Hyd. (OUT)
3. Two C.D. Copies.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Labour Court was correct in granting partial back wages of Rs.150 per month for a violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act.
Whether the petitioner has a valid ground to challenge the reinstatement order as illegal or arbitrary.
Whether the High Court should quash the Labour Court's award under Article 226.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
The Managing Director Andhra Pradesh Foods, Nacharam, I.D.A.; Hyderabad
1 Presiding Officer Labour Court-III, Hyderabad
Sri G. Yesupadam
G. Bikshapathy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
