SPECIAL OFFICER Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the Award of the first respondent dated 24.5.2002 in C.P.Nos.147 and 141 of 1999 and to quash the same. The management is the writ petitioner.

(2.) In the claim statement filed by the workers/second respondents in both the writ petitions, the petitioner had stated that the workers/second respondents were working in the respondent's Mill from 19.2.1979 and they used to work normally from 6.00 a.m to 6.00 p.m. It is further stated that they have worked over time from 15.2.1996 to 31.5.1997 as detailed in the annexure. There are punch cards available with the management, which if, produced can reveal the working time of the workers/second respondents. In spite of demand for the over time wages, the same was not considered by the management. Therefore the second respondents prayed for computation of the money value of the benefits under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(3.) In the counter filed by the respondent/the writ petitioner herein, the management contended that the claim was highly belated. The workers/second respondents were never directed to do any over time and no order was issued for the payment of any over time. The employees did not also do any over time work. It was further contended that the proceedings under Section 33-C(2) are in the nature of execution proceedings and no claim for entitlement can be sought to be established in a proceeding under Section 33-C of the Act. A written submission was also filed by the management contending that the salary of the workers/second respondents were above the statutory limit of salary and hence the employees were not workmen within the meaning of Section 2(S) of the Act.