South Eastern Koyla Mazdoor Congress (Reg.No.4139) v. A.P.Panda

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 282 of 2019

1. South Eastern Koyla Mazdoor Congress (Reg. No. 4139) Through Its President, Gopal Narayan Singh, S/o Late Manoraman Singh, Aged About 50 years, R/o Quarter No. IIB /34 J.P. Colony, S.E.C.L. District Korba Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

1. A.P. Panda, Chair Man Cum Managing Director S.E.C.L. Bhawan, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

2. Dr. R.S. Jha (Director Personnel) S.E.C.L. Bhawan, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

3. Shri A.K. Saksena, General Manager (P And A) And Industrial Relation) S.E.C.L. Bhawan, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Contemnors) ---- Respondents For Applicant :

Mr. N.K. Vyas, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Advocate For SECL :

Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 10.07.2019

1. The counsels appearing for the respondents submit that the respondents have already vide their communication dated 01.04.2019, issued by Respondent No. 02 taken a decision for complying the order passed by this Court on 13.11.2018 in WPL No. 87 of 2018.

2. At this juncture, the counsel for the applicant/petitioner submits that the respondent management at times have not called the

petitioner union for the Company Level Meeting which they were permitting prior to the order dated 11.01.2017.

3. Similarly, the counsel for the applicant/petitioner further submits that so far as the petitioner/applicant is concerned, the calender also is not published and circulated to them, which again causes hindrance for the union activities of the applicant/petitioner.

4. Likewise, the respondents are also neither carrying out any inspection nor are they ensuring time schedule for the applicant union, which they were doing in the past. Neither is the applicant union called upon in the Committee Meetings nor in the Safety Meeting etc. all of which they were doing in the past ie., prior to 11.01.2017.

5. The counsel appearing for the respondents makes a categorical statement that the order of this Court is being complied with in its letter and spirit. According to the respondents, there appears to be some interim orders in some other writ petitions in respect of the dispute between two trade union groups which is creating some hurdle. The dispute interse between the Trade Union should not come in the way of the respondents from complying with the orders passed by this Court or else a specific order should be passed by the respondents determining the status of the petitioners.

6. The respondents, so far as their IR system is concerned should be more concerned with the orders passed by this Court. Since the respondent counsel has assured that the order passed by this Court shall be ordered to be complied with in letter and spirit, the

present Contempt Petition, at this juncture stands disposed off expecting the respondents to honour their words. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rahul