M SENTHILKUMAR Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents No.1 and 2 to recover Rs.1,13,794/- along with interest and cost from the 3rd respondent as per G.O.(D).No.446, Labourand Employment (C) Department dated 29.04.2004 and disburse to the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner claims that he was employed with the third respondent and certain amount is due to him and therefore, the petitioner filed C.P.No.346/2002 under Section 33(C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Labour Court, Salem. THE third respondent was called absent and set exparte. THE labour Court allowed the petition, directing the third respondent to pay a sum of Rs.1,13,794/- to the petitioner with 9% interest. To implement the said order of the Labour Court, the petitioner filed an application to the Government, which resulted in passing of the G.O.(D).No.446, Labourand Employment (C) Department dated 29.04.2004.THE Government directed the Collector of Aurangabad District, Mahastrastra to take steps for recovery of the said sum together with the interest and cost from the third respondent and disburse the same to the petitioner. THE petitioner made an application to the second respondent/Collector of Aurangabad and also caused a lawyer notice on 06.09.2004.Since no action has been taken by the second respondent, the present writ petition has been filed. Section 33 (C) (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, provides as follows:

(3.) CONSIDERING of the above, a mandamus is issued as prayed for as against the second respondent. The second respondent is directed to implement the first respondent Government Order in G.O.(D).No.446, Labourand Employment (C) Department dated 29.04.2004 for recovery of the amount specified within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This writ petition is ordered as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.