UMA SHANKAR Vs. HINDUSTAN CARBIDE PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner/Workman has invoked the powers under Sections 11 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging that the Hindustan Carbide Pvt. Ltd. is guilty of committing contempt of the Orders of this Court. The Respondent has denied this allegation and has submitted that adequate remedy is available to the Workman under the Industrial Disputes Act, which should be pursued by the Workman instead of this Petition.

(2.) In brief, the facts of the case are that the Petitioner's services had been terminated on 5.2.1987. An Award came to be published on 8.5.1998 in terms of which the Workman was reinstated in service along with full back-wages, but these Orders have allegedly not been complied with. The Management had filed Civil Writ Petition No.817/1999 assailing this Award. On 12.2.1999, the Management was directed to deposit the awarded amount within four weeks and subject to doing so, the operation of the impugned Award would be stayed. It transpires that the Workman had initiated recovery proceedings in which a recovery of Rs.79,852/- was sought to be made under Section 33 (C) of the Industrial Disputes Act. However, the Workman has not as yet succeeded in making any recoveries. In the course of the hearing of the Writ Petition, upon Civil Miscellaneous Application No.14481/1999 under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act having been filed by the Workman, on 28.5.2001 this Court ordered the Management to pay the Workman full last drawn wages inclusive of any maintenance allowance admissible to him under any Rule. The complete text is available in M/s.Hindustan Carbide Pvt. Ltd. Versus National Capital Territory of Delhi, Ors., 94(2001) DELHI LAW TIMES 331. It was clarified that the wages last drawn shall not be below the prescribed minimum wages payable from time to time. This payment was to be made within four weeks of May 28, 2001 and thereafter was to be paid month to month. The Management had approached the Hon'ble Division Bench against the Orders under Section 17-B and upon issuing notice of the Letters Patents Appeal No.339/2001, the Division Bench recorded the undertaking of the learned counsel for the Management that the entire awarded amount would be deposited within six weeks. The Division Bench directed the stay of the operation of the impugned Order under Section 17-B, conditional on this deposit being made. The challenge to the Order under Section 17-B ended on 10.12.2001 when the Letters Patents Appeal No.339/2001 was disposed of with the direction that the aggregate of the last wages drawn should be released to the Workman unconditionally, but so far as the difference between this amount and the total of the minimum wages was concerned, security to the satisfaction of the Registrar General was to be furnished by the Workman in order to withdraw it. The operative part of the Judgment being Hindustan Carbide Pvt. Ltd. Versus Government of NCT OF Delhi and Ors., 95 (2002) DELHI LAW TIMES 689 (DB) reads thus:

(3.) On October 11, 2002 the Civil Writ Petition No.817/1999 was dismissed by Hon'ble Justice Madan B.Lokur on observing complete non-compliance with the Orders dated 28.5.2001. The Court held that the "Workman is entitled to take such steps as are necessary for effectuating the orders passed by this Court as well as the Award passed by the learned Labour Court." Thus ended the Management's abortive attempt to assail the Award.