Raja Kumaraswamy Vs The Chairman and Managing Director

¶1

[32s21

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 28993 OF 2o22

¶7

Between:

¶8

Raja Kumaraswamy, S/o. Raja Rathnam, Occ. Badli Worker, Aqed about 52 ygq.{sr R/o. H.No. 37-55, Yapal Area, 2nd Ward, Mandamarri Mancherial (Adilabad) District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The .Chairman and lVlanaging Direcior, The Singareni Collieries company Limited, Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderabid.

¶12

2 The Director (P-A and \M, ]he Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Kothagudem, Khammam District.

¶13

J The.General Manager (Per9911e_!), Wglfare and CSR, The Singareni Collieries Cgqpany Limited (SCCL), Welfare Wing, Corporate Fersonnet Department, Singareni Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶14

4 J.he. Limited (SCCL), Mandamarri^{GgngralManager,Mandamarri,} Area, Mancherral^{The Singareni} lAdilabad;'qistrict.^Collieries Companv'

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the natuie of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No. 1 to 4 in not issuing back wages with interest from the date of removal, till the date of re-appointment along with all statutory benefits as per the Mines Act and the Nationat coal wages Agreement is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the National coal wages Agreement guidelines and violative of Articles 14, '16 and 21 ot rhe constitution of lndia and unconstitutional.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶18

Petition under Section 1 51 cPC praying iliat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to permit the petitioner herein, to amend subsituted the main relief in w.p. No, 2g993 of 2022, as under. to issue a Writ, Order or direction, more particularly one in the

¶19

nature of Writ of Mandamous, declaring that the Award made in lndustrial Dispute L.C. No. 13212006, Dated.22.09.2016, on the file of the Court of the Centrat Government lndustrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Hyderabad, in so far as not issuing back wages with interest from the date of removal, till the date of re-appointment along with all statutory benefits as per the Mines Act and the National Coal Wages Agreement are concerned, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to the guidelines National Coal Wages Agreement, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and unconstitutional, by holding that the petitioner is eligible and entitled for back wages from the date of removal, till the date of re-appointment along-with all statutory benefits with interest

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondents 1 to 4 to grant backwages with interest along from the date of removal and the date of re-appointment along with all statutory benefits as per the Mines Act and the National Coal Wages Agreement pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. CH VENKAT RAMAN

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI CH. VENKAT RAMAN REPRESENTTNG FOR sRl P sRt HARSHA REDDY (SC FOR S|NGARENI COLLTERTES CO.LTD)

¶24

The Coud made the following: ORDER

¶25

I

¶26

.l

¶27

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLT NANDA

¶28

WRIT P TION o.2899 3 oF 20 22

¶29

o RDER:

¶30

Heard Sri Ch.Venkat Raman, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri p.Sri Harsha Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents,

¶31

2. The ti ner a ro h th c u e kin r er

¶32

as under:

¶33

",..to. issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus deilaring the action of the Respondent No. 1 to 4 in not iiiuing back wages with interest from the date of removal till the date of reappointment along with all ,tutrioiy benefits as per the Mines Act and the National Coal Wages Agreement is iilesat, 3l?lr--.y anO .ontraiyr to the N-ational Coal Wages Agreement guidelines and viplative of Articles t4, 16 and 21 of the Conriitrtrn of India and unconstitutional and to pass...,.

¶34

It is specific case of the petitioner that the action of the Respondent Nos. 1to 4 in not releasing back wages with interest from the date of removal till the date of reappointment along with all statutory benefits as per the Mines Act and the National Coal Wages Agreement is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the

"--=n \t -E^</sup>

)

SN. J

\

National Coal Wages^{Agreement guidelines and violative of} Articles 14, 16 and^{21 of the Constitution of India}

¶40

PE USED THE RECORD.

¶41

A.T e relevant oortion of the order ated 22.O9.2016 oassed in Industrial^{dioute L.C.No.132l2O6 on the file} of the Central Government^{IndustrialTriunal cumLa bou r} Cour atH d era bad DE rta tntn o to the Indu str a I Disⁿ ut^e between the^{petitioner and the 4th resDOndenthe} tn ts

¶42

extract ed hereun^{der: -}

¶43

"It is ordered that the workman Sri^{Rajkumar Swamy} be taken into service^{as fresh employeei.e, Badlifiller ln} Cat.I.,on initial basic^{pay without'back wagesand} continuity of service, subject^{to medicalfitnessby the} company Medical Board and^{the workmanbe kept under} probation for a^period of one^{year.The managementis} also directed to take an^{undertaking of good behaviour} from the workman at^{the time of his posting."}

¶44

DISCUSSION AND^CONCLUSION:-

¶45

Learned counsel^{appearingon behalf of the petitioner} submits that the action^{of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 in not} releasing back^{wageswith interestfrom the date of petitioner's} removal, till the date^{of reappointment along with all statutory} benefits as^per the^{Mines Act and National Coal Wages} Agreement^{is illegal, arbitrary and contraryto the National Coal}

F,

4

J

SN. J

Wages Agreement guidelines and therefore, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner is entitled for the relief as prayed for by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition.

¶51

Learned standing counsel appearing on behatf of the respondents draws attention of this Court to the Award, dated 22.09.?OLG passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132I2OO6 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad and contends that Award of the Labour Court, dated 22,O9.2OLG passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.13212006 did not permit grant of back wages with interest to the petitioner herein from the date of removal till ttr e date of reappointment along with all statutory benefits and therefore, the writ petitioner as not entitled for the retief as prayed for by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition, since the respondents cannot go beyond the Award passed by the Labour Court on 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132l2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad.

1

4

S^!. J

Learned standing counsel appearing^{on behalf of the} respondents however contends that it^{is open tothe} petitioner to challenge the Award, dated^22.09-2OLG passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132l2OO5 on^{the file} of the Central Government^{IndustrialTribunal cum Labour} Court at Hyderabad.

¶56

Learned counsel appearing^{on behalf of the petitioner} does not dispute the said submission^{made by the learned} standing counsel appearing on^{behalf of the respondent} corporatio n.

¶57

Taki no into conside ration:-

¶58

a) The aforesaid facts and^{circumstances of the case.} I

¶59

b) The submissions made by the^{learnedcounsel} appearing on behalf of the^{petitionerand learned standing} counsel appearing on behalf^{of the respondents.}

¶60

c) The contents of the order dated^{22.O9.2OLGpassed} in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132l2006^{on the file of the} Central Government^{IndustrialTribunal cum LabourCourt}

SN, J

( I

)

at Hyderabad pertaining to the Industria! Dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent herein

¶65

d) The fact that the 4th respondent cannot go beyond the Award. dated 22.O9.2O16 passed in fndustrial dispute L.C.No.132120O6 on the file of the Centrat Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad,, which clearly directed the 4th respondent herein to take the petitioner into the service as a fresh employee i.e., Badli filler in Category-I on initial basic pay without back wages and continuity of service subject to the medicat fitness by the company medical board.

¶66

The Wrlt Pe nts disposed of, qivinq libe to h ner to sue ere edi as av ab! the etitio ra arn th Aw ted 2 20L d infn ial R ut .c.N 132 oo nth fit of e Cen ernm tIn ustri Tri al La ur Cou rt at Hyde ad stnGe the relief as oraved for bv the etitioner nn be an an no ctio n n e issued contra to th a dat 22.09. o16 oassed in I ta ts u .C.No.132 20 on fit of th

¶67

r-\ ***l

6

sN. l

..1

Central Government Industrial^{Tribuna! cum LabourCourt} at Hvderabad, unless the same is challenqed before

¶72

aoDro oriate Authoritv.^{However, thereshall be noorder}

¶73

as to costs.

¶74

Miscellaneous petitions, if any,^{pending in this Writ}

¶75

Petition, shall stand closed. r I

¶76

\ \

¶77

SD/. N.RAJAGOPAL PUTY REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER

¶78

To,

¶79

The Chairman and Managing Director, The Singareni Collieries company Limited, Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderabad.

¶80

The Director (PA and W), The Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Kothagudem, Khammam District.

¶81

The General Manager (Personnel), Welfare and CSR, Thb Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Welfare Wing, Corporate Personnel Department, Singareni Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶82