The Managing Director v. Thiru Victor,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.02.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD).No.13955 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD).No.10375 of 2016 1.The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, No.42, Thambusamy Road, Chennai-600 010.

2.The Senior Regional Manager, The Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Tiruchirapalli.

...Petitioners

Vs.

1.Victor 2.The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Thiruchirapalli.

...Respondents

PRAYER : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the second respondent dated 21.01.2016 and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.P.Seetharaman For Respondents : Mr.A.Arunprasad for R1 : R2-Labour Court

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2.The first respondent was employed in the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Chennai as Assistant Quality Inspector. The non inclusion of the name of the first respondent in the promotion panel was raised as a industrial dispute by the Union on I.D.No.87 of 1999, before the Labour Court, Trichirapalli. The Labour Court allowed the I.D. and award was passed in favour of the first respondent. The respondent/Management filed W.P.(MD).No.45290 of 2002. But the same was dismissed for default on 29.03.2012. The application for restoration of the Writ Petition was also dismissed. Thus the award made in I.D.No.87 of 1999, has become final. For https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

seeking payment of the benefits payable to him, the first respondent filed C.P.No.41 of 2013, under Section 33(C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The said C.P. was allowed on 21.01.2016. The same is questioned in the Writ Petition by the Management. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/Management wanted this Court to set aside the order passed by the Labour Court, Tiruchirapalli.

4.This Court is unable to agree with the reasons set out in the grounds filed in support of the Writ Petition. When the I.D award has already become final, the C.P. order is only a consequential proceedings and the same cannot be interfered with. There is no merit in the Writ Petition.

5.The Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Thiruchirapalli.

+1cc to Mr.A.Arunprasad, Advocate, SR.No.49693 +1cc to Mr.P.Seetharaman, Advocate, SR.No.49610 ORDER MADE IN W.P.(MD).No.13955 of 2016 16.02.2018 tsg RAM JM/SV MMS/SAR 4/02.05.2018/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/