JOSEPH Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S.20 of the Kerala Agricultural Workers Act provides that agricultural workers entitled to claim arrears of wages can apply to the Conciliation Officer, and that that Officer can "direct" the landowner to pay the arrears found due, after such enquiry as he considers necessary and after hearing the parties. S.23 provides for an appeal to the Agricultural Tribunal, against the "order passed by Conciliation Officer", and prescribes that such appeal shall be preferred

(2.) The question is whether the above view of the Tribunal is correct or not. The contention of the petitioner is that no one can file an appeal against an order, until he comes to know that such an order is passed, and that it is adverse to him. Limitation can start only from the date of knowledge, and not from the date of the order itself, unless it is pronounced in his presence, it is urged.

(3.) The question is not free from doubt, as can be seen from decided cases to be presently referred to. But one or two aspects have to be noticed before turning to these cases. The first is that S.20 does not provide for pronouncement of orders in the presence of parties or with notice to them. There is also no provision for communicating the orders or their substance, to the parties. Even R.10 and 11 are silent on these aspects; in fact, R.11 reiterates that the appeal shall be filed ''within 30 days from the date on which the order appealed against is passed". The second aspect to be noticed is that there are no other provisions for appeals against decisions rendered under the Act, for the purpose of comparing their language with the phraseology of S.23. And the third is that while S.20 speaks of a direction by the Conciliation Officer, S.23 speaks of an "order passed" by him.