AREVA TANDD INDIA LTD Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is directed against the award passed by the Labour Court in C.P.No.827 of 1997 dated 10.11.2006, by which the Labour Court directed the petitioner/Management, to pay an amount of Rs.11,468/- to the second respondent/workman, by computing the same in the petition filed by the second respondent under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(2.) THE second respondent was working as an Operator in the petitioner Company, having been appointed as a casual labourer during 1975 and he was stated to be eligible for promotion as Assistant Foreman. Each employee is given a Job Card at the time of allotment of work and after completion of the work, the employee can leave the place even before the scheduled time and the employees are to fill up the timings in the Job Card. (a) It is stated that from 15.07.1994, the petitioner refused to put the entire time allotted for each panel of work in spite of the fact that the second respondent had finished the work earlier and only the actual time taken for completion of the work was taken into consideration by disallowing the balance period. (b) According to the petitioner/Management, during the period between 15.07.1994 and 01.10.1994, the second respondent, was working as an Operator in the Cubicle Gear Multi Motor Circuit Centre, for which the Group Leader used to allot work to the workers, who would also work along with them and at the end of the day, they had to fill up the work ticket, which is the Job Card and hand over the same to the Group Leader and in case where such work ticket was not given to the Group Leader, it would be considered as if the worker had not done his work and he would not be entitled for earning the wages and if the workman did not work as allotted by the Group Leader, he would be treated as absent, not entitled for wages. (c) It was on that basis the second respondent was deprived of 15000 minutes in the Job Card, for which according to the second respondent, he was entitled for wages. It is, claiming the said amount, apart from 20% bonus + exgratia amount of Rs.1500/- for the disallowed work for 54 days, the second respondent has claimed an amount of Rs.11,468/-.

(3.) AS stated above, it has been the case of the second respondent/workman that it was due to the conduct of the petitioner/Management, in refusing to mark the entire time allotted to complete the panel of work of the second respondent, he suffered loss. Even though the second respondent being the senior most Operator, finished his work much earlier, the second respondent was deprived of 15,000 minutes and therefore, he was entitled for wages for the said period apart from the bonus and exgratia amount, however wages for 54 days was disallowed to the extent of Rs.9967.59, and adding the bonus and exgratia amount, he would be entitled for a total amount of Rs.11,468/-.