A PERIYAKARUPPAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COMMON Order: Heard both sides. The first Writ Petition in W.P.No.16757 of 1998 is filed by one A. Periyakaruppan and 22 other workmen seeking for a direction to the first respondent, the District Collector, Sivaganga to recover the total amount of Rs.4,28,484/- as per G.O.Ms.No.(D) No.613 dated 8.7.1996 from the fourth and fifth respondents and realise the same and give it to the petitioners with an interest @ 16% p.a. The said G.O came to be issued in terms of Sec.33-C(1) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 enabling the Government to recover any amount computed by the Labour Court as an arrear of Land Revenue.

(2.) AS a sequel to that proceeding, Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, Sivagangai R.W.S. Division has filed the writ petition challenging the said G.O and the order in claim petition in the second writ petition.

(3.) HOWEVER, Ms. Sudharsana Sunder learned counsel appearing for the TWAD Board submits that even de hors the order, the workman is not eligible in getting the payment as ordered by the Labour Court. She made two submissions in that regard. The first was that subsequent to a Sec. 12(3) settlement, the workmen were disqualified from claiming any amount on account of their reinstatement. Secondly, the liability to make payment falls with the Local body and not with the TWAD Board especially when the scheme was entrusted to the Local body.