High Court for State of TelanganaWP/14711/2002dismissed

The Superintending Engineer, Oand M Nshes v. The Presiding Officer Labour Court-Iii

2018-10-04Abhinand Kumar Shavili3 pages

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.14711 OF 2002 ORDER (ORAL):

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order passed by the Labour Court - III, Hyderabad, in M.P. No.54 of 1997 dated 07.07.2001 and to set aside the same holding as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri G. Vidya Sagar, learned senior counsel, appearing for Smt. K. Udaya Sri, learned counsel for the petitioner - APGenco, and the learned Government Pleader for Labour, and perused the material on record.

3. It has been contended by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that respondent Nos.2 to 5 - workmen were engaged through a contractor and the petitioner has no control over those workmen, but, the workmen had filed M.P. No54 of 1997 seeking wages as per the notification dated 25-07-1995 and the Labour Court had erroneously awarded wages by allowing the said M.P. as prayed for directing the petitioner to pay wages to the workmen accordingly. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition is filed. It has been further contended that the workmen claimed enhancement of wages for unskilled, semiskilled and skilled workers at the rate of Rs.500/-, Rs.550/- and Rs.600/- respectively, with effect from 17.05.1995 and notification issued by the State Government enhancing their wages for unskilled, semiskilled and skilled workers was given effect from

AKS,J WP No.14711 of 2002 25.07.1995, as such, the question of paying enhanced wages as per the notification issued by the State Government would not arise and that the Labour Court has erroneously allowed the M.P. filed by the workmen.

4. The learned Government Pleader for Labour appearing for the State Government had contended that the State Government had issued notification on 25.07.1995 and the wages for unskilled, semiskilled and skilled workers have been enhanced and the workmen are entitled to the wages as per the said notification and that the Labour Court had rightly passed the order impugned in favour of the workmen and there is no illegality or irregularity committed by the Labour Court in passing the same.

5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that when this matter had came up for admission, by the order dated 09.08.2002, this Court was pleased to grant interim suspension on the condition that the petitioner shall deposit half of the amount as directed by the Labour Court in the order impugned.

6. The only issue which remains to be adjudicated is in respect of remaining half of the amount as directed by the Labour Court. The petitioner could not point out any grave irregularity or illegality in the order impugned. The Labour Court has gone into merits of the case and gave a specific finding that the workmen are entitled to enhanced wages. On one hand the petitioner is contending that the workmen are engaged through a contractor and on the other, they contend that the

AKS,J WP No.14711 of 2002 workmen claim for enhanced wages of unskilled, semiskilled and skilled workers is with effect from 17.05.1995, which goes contrary to the stand taken by them that the workmen are engaged through a contractor.

7. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit to entertain this writ petition.

8. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition stand closed.

______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J October 4, 2018.