Allowed

A.P. Dairy Development Co-op. Federation Ltd, v. The Additional Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court

Telangana HC2 Feb 2010WP/143/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashes an Industrial Tribunal order adjudicating disputed questions of entitlement under Section 33-C(2) ID Act 1947. The court holds such adjudication is in excess of jurisdiction and directs recovery of deposited amounts via application.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order before the court is set aside. The petitioner is directed to take steps for recovery of the deposited amount. Liberty granted to move an application for withdrawing the deposit if n

A.P. Dairy Development Co-op. Federation… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO.143 OF 2004

¶3

DATED 2 ND FEBRUARY, 2010

¶4

BETWEEN

¶5

A.P. Dairy Development Co.op. Federation Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, Lalapet, Hyderabad. … Petitioner And The Additional Industrial Tribunal-cumLabour Court, Hyderabad. And Another … Respondents

¶6

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.143 OF 2004

¶8

ORDER:

¶9

The issue raised in this writ petition is with regard to the scope and exercise of jurisdiction by the Labour Court in a petition filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The matter is squarely covered by my order dated 05.12.2009 in W.P.No.144 of 2004, wherein I had held that in a petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947, which is in the nature of an execution proceeding, the Labour Court cannot adjudicate disputed questions as to the very entitlement of the workman to the amount claimed. The order in M.P.No.12 of 2000 dated 22.08.2003, under challenge in the present case, which adjudicated such questions was in excess of jurisdiction and is therefore liable to be set aside.

¶10

The writ petition is accordingly allowed.

¶11

It is brought to my notice that this Court vide order dated 06.01.2004 directed the petitioner herein to deposit half of the amount payable under the order passed by the Labour Court within a period of six weeks, granting liberty to the respondent-workman to withdraw the same without furnishing any security. It is for the petitioner to take appropriate steps for recovery of the said amount pursuant to this order setting aside the order of the Labour Court. In the event the respondent workman has not withdrawn the sum deposited by the petitioner before the Labour Court pursuant to the interim order, the petitioner is given liberty to move an appropriate application for withdrawing the same. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J.

¶13

2^ND FEBRUARY, 2010. VGSR

A.P. Dairy Development Co-op. Federation Ltd, v. The Additional Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.P. Dairy Development Co-op. Federation Ltd, v. The Additional Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court

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

Sri Santosh Vidyaniketan High School, Bhongir, Nalgonda Vs The Government of a.P., rep.by its Secretary, School

Guthi Nageswara Rao, S/o.Muni Ramachandra Naidu Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary

U.R. Krishna, Vs The Honble Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court

A.P.Dairy Development Co.op.Federation Ltd., Vs The Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

A.P.Dairy Development Co-op.Federation Ltd. Vs The Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-

The Depot Manager, Vs B.Nagesh