In The Matter Of: Tapas Tarafdar vs Union Of India & Ors

This writ petition has been listed under heading 'to be mentioned' at instance of petitioner union citing urgency. Affidavit of service is filed.

Ms. Saha, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, 350 workers were retrenched by contractor Five Star Logistics Private Limited who had been engaged by Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Limited (CIWTC). She submits, prayer of these workers for moving Court is that impugned certificate dated 7th November, 2017 saying conciliation proceedings is completed on no settlement reached, be stayed. For long Industrial Tribunal was not available. Recently said Tribunal has commenced functioning but process of reference being made and adjudication thereupon by the Tribunal will be a long run, hence, this order be stayed for conciliation to proceed further so that workers might obtain relief therein.

Mr. Majumder, learned advocate appears on behalf of CIWTC and submits, possession of godowns in question was returned to Kolkata Port Trust (KPT) on his client having ceased operations. His client has paid to the contractor employed, on tonnage basis, and matter stood closed. In any event claims of workmen are against contractor for, inter alia, retrenchment compensation and as such reference, if to be made, must be made under section 12(4) read with section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Mr. Majumder submits further, with reference to letter dated 6th April, 2017 of the Union, dispute raised by workers is with regard to retrenchment compensation, payment of gratuity along with other legal dues. There is no adjudication necessary since retrenchment stands accepted by the workers. Therefore, it's a matter of computation under sub-section (2) of section 33(C).

Mr. Jena, learned advocate appears on behalf of KPT and submits, his client has been unnecessarily named as party respondent. His client has no connection with the working of contract labourers under principal employer CIWTC. His client has claims against CIWTC for overstaying their welcome, which claims are being dealt with in other proceedings. He submits, his client's name should be struck off from arraignment of parties in this writ petition.

Conclusion is retrenchment has happened with all attendant consequences, which is inferred on presumption by absence of contractor respondent no. 6 inspite of service demonstrated by affidavit of service. Petitioner must apply for claims of the workmen, being computed in terms of money, as to be decided by such Labour Court specified in this behalf by appropriate Government.

The writ petition stands disposed of.