BHILAI STEEL PLANT Vs. BRAHMANAND TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this batch of petitions, the petitioner i.e. Bhilai Steel Plant has challenged the orders passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short 'the Act of 1972') whereby the orders passed by the Controlling Authority have been affirmed.

(2.) The facts of the cases are as under:-

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/ Bhilai Steel Plant would submit that initially, the Workmen were the employees of the Cooperative Societies. He would further submit that they were never appointed by the Bhilai Steel Plant or the Steel Authority of India Ltd. He would contend that employees were working with the canteens. It is argued that they were appointed between the years 1975 to 1980 respectively, but they never claimed regularization or the status of employees of Bhilai Steel Plant prior to the year 1992. He would contend that for the first time, a writ petition was filed in the year 1992 and the matter went up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. A direction was issued to treat the canteen workers as employees of the Bhilai Steel Plant or to provide them with the status of employees of the Bhilai Steel Plant. He would further contend that an Industrial Dispute was also raised by the canteen workers and an award was passed in their favour on 6/2/2003. A writ petition was filed by the Bhilai Steel Plant and the matter was remitted back. He would also contend that during the pendency of the Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the matter was settled between the parties on 20/10/2004 and appointment orders were issued in their favour. It is argued that the canteens workers never challenged the settlement arrived at between the parties dtd. 20/10/2004 and thus it attained finality. He would argue that the canteens workers after their retirement and receiving the amount of gratuity, moved applications at a belated stage claiming therein the amount of additional gratuity on the ground that their past services with Cooperative Societies have not been taken into consideration. He would further argue that the stand taken by the canteen workers was not tenable before the Controlling Authority. He would also argue that the canteen workers got the status of the Bhilai Steel Plant employees in the year 2009 and the Cooperative Societies made payment of gratuity up to 2004 in the year 2010 and they accepted it without raising any objection. He would further state that the appointment orders issued in favour of the canteen workers clearly provide that they would get service benefits from the date of their appointment i.e. 20/10/2004 and those orders were accepted without any demur. In support of his submissions, he placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. and another Vs. Shramik Sena and others, 1999(6) SCC 439 and Balwant Rai Saluja and another Vs. Air India Limited and others, 2014 (9) SCC 407.