AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Delay in filing the appeals is condoned. The applications u/s 5 of the Limitation Act stand allowed.
By way of these appeals, the appellants have assailed the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge whereby learned Single Judge has
dismissed the writ petitions.
A public sector corporation claiming to be an ideal employer has done a great injustice to the poor employees which indicated in the observations
made by learned Single Judge which reads as under:-
(16) In view of the findings of this Court in the Writ Petition No.4244/1999 whereby the award passed by the Labour Court in LCR No 206/1986 has
been upheld, writ petition Nos.3289/2006, 3770/2006, 3774/2006, 3778/2006, 7209/2006, 7864/2006, 7867/2006, 8125/2006, 8129/2006 and 12429/2016
preferred by the RSRTC with regard to assailing the order passed by labour Court on application whether Section 33-C-(2) also stand dismissed as the
only ground taken in all the writ petition is that the aforesaid writ petition No.4244/1999 was pending and if the amount computed under 33-C-(2) is
released, very purpose of filing writ petition preferred against the original award shall stand frustrated. It is also observed that during the pendency of
these petitions, the Corporation has presented FDR No.0357403 dated 20.05.2006 amounting to Rs. 21,21,454/before the Deputy Registrar (Judicial)
but the same has not been released to the workmen. Applications had been moved for releasing the amount of the each workman share as all of them
grown very old. This was in terms of order passed by the Court on 08.05.2006 which has been quoted as under : -
“Without expressing any opinion on merits, since in course of arguments, record of Labour Court was needed for proper adjudication of dispute on
merits, I consider it proper that further recovery proceedings in pursuance of impugned Award shall remain stayed, provided amount computed by
Labour Court u/S 33-C-(2) in pursuance of impugned Award is deposited by petitioner Corporation on or before 21/05/2006 in a separate A/c with any
Scheduled Bank in form of Fixed deposit for initial period of six months with the stipulation that disbursement of its maturity amount alongwith interest
accruing thereon shall be made under orders of this Court and subject to final decision of CWP No.4224/99. Original FDR of afore ordered amount be
produced before Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court who will keep it in safe custody in accordance with rules and its certified copy be given to
opposite counsel.â€
(17) Having reached to the conclusion that the award is just and proper the consequences from the said order now deserves to be released in favour
of the said workman mentioned in the list or to their legal representatives as several of them have now expired and their legal representatives have
either filed applications under Section 33©(2) earlier or also moved an application before this Court. It is now directed that while the amount which
has been deposited in fixed deposit be released in favour of the workmen for the purpose of disbursement to the workmen mentioned in the award
dated 16.01.1998 or to their legal representatives as the case may be. The subsequent benefit which flow from the award date 16.01.1998 be also
now released and arrears thereto be calculated by the RSRTC within a period of three months from today.
We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. No case is made out for interference.
The appeals stand dismissed with a cost of Rs.500/-in each appeal on the appellant which shall be deposited in the Rajasthan State Legal Services
Authority, Jaipur.