HEMANT SINGH Vs. ADHYAKSHA ZILA PANCHAYAT ETAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was initially engaged as a car driver on daily wage basis with Zila Panchayat, Etah on 10.8.1992. He continued to work till 1.8.1994, when the respondent stopped taking work from the petitioner on the ground that the car which was being driven by him had become unfit. Thereafter Zila Panchayat procured a new car in December, 1995 and instead of engaging or appointing the petitioner as a Car driver, it engaged Respondent No. 5 Vijai Singh as a new Car driver. Aggrieved by such action of the respondents, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute and the State Government referred the matter to Labour Court for adjudication. By an award dated 16.10.1997 passed by the Labour Court, the petitioner was reinstated in service with full back wages and continuity of service. The said award was challenged by the Zila Panchayat, Etah in writ petition No. 30805 of 1998 in which an interim order had been initially passed on 12.10.1998 by which it was directed that the back wages shall be deposited with the labour court and the compliance of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 shall be made. The said interim order was modified by this Court on 22.5.2003 clarifying that the petitioner shall be paid the current wages by the Respondent No. 2. The said order was to remain effective for three months and the case was directed to be listed after six weeks. However, the writ petition was finally disposed of by this Court only on 18.3.2004 with the direction that the petitioner herein (Hemant Singh) was to be paid full salary from the date of reinstatement under the interim order of this Court. With regard to the back wages, it was directed that only 50% of the same would be payable to him from 1.1.1993 till the date of his reinstatement. It is not disputed that the petitioner had been reinstated in service only on 19.3.2001.

(2.) After the disposal of the writ petition filed by Zila Panchayat, the Chairman of the Zila Panchayat passed an order dated 3.7.2004 directing that in compliance of the judgment of this Court dated 18.3.2004 passed in writ petition No. 30805 of 1998 the petitioner would be treated in service on the post of a Car driver in the pay scale of Rs. 3050-4950/- and would also be entitled to other benefits of dearness allowance etc. granted from time to time by various Government Orders. It was further directed that 50% of the salary with effect from 1.1.1996 to 18.3.2001 was also to be paid to him, after adjusting any amount which had been paid to the petitioner in compliance of the order of the labour court or the interim order passed by the High Court. However, thereafter by an order dated 7.10.2004 the Chairman, Zila Pachayat cancelled his earlier order dated 3.7.2004 and directed that the petitioner would only be paid the back wages at the rate of payment made to a daily wager and not a regular car driver. The petitioner has thus filed this writ petition challenging the said order dated 7.10.2004. A further prayer has also been made that the respondents may be directed to implement the order dated 3.7.2004 which has been passed in compliance of the judgment of this Court dated 18.3.2004.

(3.) I have heard Sri Shyam Narain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri S.N. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the contesting Respondents No. 1, 2, 4 and 5 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 3 and have perused the record.