SANJAY SUGANDHIT DHOOP Vs. RAJINDER SINGH AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent No. 1, who was employed with the appellant applied for leave on medical grounds and submitted a medical certificate in support of his application. The appellant asked him to get the same verified from ESIC, whereupon an industrial dispute was raised by him alleging termination of his services. Vide Award dated 29.1.2002, the Labour Court held that the act of the appellant amounted to retrenchment. The appellant filed WP(C) No. 1760/2003 questioning the award dated 29.1.2002 passed by the Labour Court. In the writ petition, an application under Section 17B of Industrial Disputes Act was filed by respondent No. 1. The learned Single Judge, vide order dated 11th May, 2009 allowed the application and directed the appellant to pay the last wages drawn by respondent No. 1 or minimum wages, whichever be higher, from the date of the award, till the disposal of the petition. The respondent No. 1 was directed to report for duty on 12th May, 2009. The case of the appellant is that respondent No. 1 did not join duty in compliance of the order. Since the appellant did not make payment to respondent No. 1 in terms of the order dated 11th May, 2009, the learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 8th February, 2012 dismissed the writ petition. He also directed issue of show cause notice to the appellant as to why he be not proceeded against for having committed contempt of the Court. The learned Single Judge rejected the contention of the appellant that the only remedy available to respondent No. 1 for enforcement of the order passed under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act was to approach the Labour Court under Section 33(c)(2) of the said Act. The issue as to whether a writ petition challenging the Award of the Labour Court can be dismissed in the event of non -compliance of the order passed by the writ court under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act or not is no more res integra and stands concludes two Division Bench decisions of this Court. In LPA No. 71/2012 decided on 25th July, 2012, allowing the appeal filed by the employer under identical circumstances, the Division Bench, inter alia, held as under: -

(2.) Since the issue involved in this appeal stands concluded by the two Division Bench decision of this Court, the impugned order dated 8th February, 2012 cannot be sustained. We accordingly set aside the order dated 8th February, 2012 and remit the matter back to the learned Single Judge for deciding the writ petition, in accordance with law.