Ashok vs Management of NWKRTC

H. Billappa, J.—In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question the award dated 23.8.2011 passed by the Addl. Labour Court, Hubli, in KID No. 39/2011 insofar as it relates to denial of full back wages and other consequential benefits. Now the petitioner has filed a memo dated 16.6.2014 which reads as under:

"The undersigned most humbly prays that, petitioner has challenged the award of the Labour Court to the extent of denial of certain benefits. However, the Management has not even reinstated the petitioner and advised him to give up back wages of 50% as granted by the Labour Court as back wages causes burden to the Management. In view of the hardship and speedy implementation of the award the petitioner has decided to give up back wages granted by the Hon''ble Labour Court from the date of dismissal till award passed by the Labour Court. Hence this memo."

The respondent has filed objections to the memo stating that the petitioner had approached the Permanent Lok Adalath by'' filing PLA No. 56/2012 for settlement. The Corporation has appeared before the Lok Adalath. The matter is still pending. But, the petitioner has approached this Court and has filed a memo making allegations against the respondent Corporation. The petitioner has stated on oath that he is ready to forego wages. The Corporation will never force a workman to give up wages. The allegations are false. Therefore, the memo may be dismissed. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has challenged the award insofar as it relates to denial of full back wages and other consequential benefits. The petitioner has been advised to give up back wages for speedy implementation of the award. The petitioner is ready to give up back wages from the date of dismissal till the date of award. 3. The learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that after the award was passed by the Labour Court, the petitioner himself has approached the Lok Adalat and filed PLA No. 56/2012 for settlement. The petitioner has agreed to forego back wages of 50% awarded by the Labour Court. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any back wages. The memo may be dismissed. She also submitted that the Divisional Controller, Chikkodi Division, Chikkodi is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service subject to the result of this writ petition.

I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties.

It is relevant to note, the petitioner has approached the Labour Court in KID No. 39/2011. The Labour Court by its award dated 23.8.2011 has set aside the order of dismissal and has directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with back wages of 50% and other consequential benefits from the date of dismissal till the date of award. Thereafter, it appears the petitioner has filed PLA No. 56/2012 before the Lok Adalath for settlement. It is stated, the petitioner is ready to forego back wages of 50% awarded by the Labour Court and ready for imposing of minor punishment for the alleged misconduct. However, no order has been passed in PLA No. 56/2012. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached this Court with this writ petition. The petitioner has filed a memo dated 16.6.2014 stating that he is advised to give up 50% back wages awarded by the Labour Court and for speedy implementation of the award he is ready to give up back wages from the date of dismissal till the date of award.

The respondent has opposed the memo contending that the petitioner himself has approached the Lok Adalath for settlement. The petitioner has stated he is ready to forego back wages. Therefore, the memo may be dismissed.

I do not find any merit in the contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent. The award has been passed by the Labour Court on 23.8.2011. The petitioner has approached this Court on 8.7.2013. So far no action has been taken to reinstate the petitioner into service. When once the award is passed directing reinstatement and reinstatement is not done, the petitioner cannot be denied wages from the date of award. There is a direction in the award for reinstatement. No doubt the petitioner has approached the Lok Adalath in PLA No. 56/2012. But, no order has been passed. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached this Court. The petitioner is ready to give up back wages of 50% awarded by the Labour Court from the date of dismissal till the date of award. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner is not entitled for wages from the date of award till the date of reinstatement. When once the award is passed directing reinstatement and reinstatement is not done, the petitioner cannot be denied wages from the date of award. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to wages from the date of award till the date of his reinstatement. However, as the petitioner himself has given up back wages of 50% awarded by the Labour Court, he is not entitled to back wages or consequential benefits from the date of dismissal till the date of award.

Accordingly the following order is passed:

(i) The petitioner is entitled to reinstatement.

(ii) The petitioner has given up back wages of 50% awarded by the Labour Court. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to back wages or consequential benefits from the date of dismissal till the date of award. However, the petitioner is entitled to wages from the date of award till the date of reinstatement.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.