Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side) Anr vs Presiding Officer

 
FREE EXCERPT

Kolkata:

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction

APPELLATE SIDE

Present :

The Hon'ble Justice Soumen Sen

W.P. No. 11852(W) of 2010

With

CAN 8036 of 2011

Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Anr.

Vs.

Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Assansol & Ors.

For the petitioner : Mr. R.N. Majumdar, Mr. Kalimuddin Mondal

For the respondent No.3 : Mr. Anant Kr. Shaw, Mr. Ravi Kumar Dubey

Heard on : 29.01.2014, 13.03.2014 Judgment on : 14th March, 2014

Soumen Sen, J.:- The petitioner in this proceeding has challenged the order dated 2nd December, 2009 passed by the learned Presiding Officer CGIT, Assansol.

During the pendency of the writ application the respondent workman has filed an application under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The said application is resisted by the writ petitioner on the ground that the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer is not an award and accordingly the application filed under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is not maintainable. The writ petitioner contends that the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer in disposing of the complaint cases filed by the workman in respect of reference 44/1999 is without jurisdiction.

The application filed under Section 17B is now under consideration. The applicant/workman was appointed by the Writ Petitioner Company on 24th October, 1990 as underground loader. The said post was subsequently re designated as fitter apprentice. The applicant was transferred from time to time to various workshops and fitter apprentice until 3rd June, 1999. On 6th July, 1997 the applicant/workman raised an industrial dispute through the union demanding regularization as lamp issue clerk. The conciliation proceeding commenced on July 7, 1997 and concluded on June 16, 1998. The conciliation officer had filed a failure report on June 24, 1998. The said dispute was referred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Asansol for adjudication being I.D. Case No.44 of 1999 which is pending since June 7, 1999. During the pendency of the said reference the workman was allowed to join at Dahibari Colliery on January 16, 2001. The workman was not given any job nor permitted to work between June 4, 1999 and January 15, 2001.

While working at Dahibari Colliery and during the pendency of the reference, the applicant workman on September 16, 2002 was transferred to Basanti Colliery. Being aggrieved by the said order of transfer, the applicant workman had lodged a complaint under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act alleging that the transfer order of the management dated September 12, 2002 in transferring him from Dahibari Colliery to Basanti Mata Colliery and subsequent release order was in violation of Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The management contested the proceeding alleging that transfer of the workman was due to closure of the mine and also consequent upon the settlement reached between the parties on termination of disciplinary proceeding after service of charge sheet and domestic enquiry. The transfer from Dahibari Colliery w.e.f. September 15, 2002 being the subject matter of reference was due to closure of mines. The Complaint Case was registered as Case No.3 of 2002.

Notwithstanding such complaint, the Company issued a charge sheet on December 7, 2002 for alleged willful absence w.e.f. 16th September, 2002. Thereafter, an Enquiry Officer was appointed. A domestic enquiry was held in which a finding being arrived at by the Enquiry Officer that there had been willful absence, the service of the applicant workman was terminated.

The Petitioner Company, thereafter, filed an application...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL