HINDUSTAN ALUMINIUM CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT-CUM-DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER PIPRI DISTRICT MIRZAPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LIST revised. No one appears for contesting respondent No.2, workman Rajendra Singh. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner employer. On 31.07.1985, an award was given by the Industrial Tribunal Allahabad in Adjudication Case No.35 of 1985 in favour of respondent workman Rajendra Singh. Through the said award, the first direction given was of reinstatement with one third back wages. The other was for payment of 50% back wages plus some more amount and no reinstatement. The employer was granted liberty to opt for either of the two options. The employer opted latter course and paid entire amount including 50% wages through draft within the time fixed by award dated 31.07.1985 and the workman got encashed the draft. Against the said award dated 31.07.1985, the workman Rajendra Singh filed W.P. No.17885 of 1985, which was dismissed on merit by this Court on 13.02.2008. However, in the said writ petition a stay order had earlier been granted restraining the employer from exercising second option under the award. This writ petition arises out of proceedings for recovery of wages under the aforesaid award initiated by the workman before the authority under Payment of Wages Act in the form of Cases No.12 of 1986, 22 of 1987 and 05 of 1989. Through this writ petition, in fact, a writ of prohibition has been sought seeking to restrain the respondent No.1 from proceeding further with the cases on the ground that the employers had opted for the second option given under the aforesaid award. In view of the fact that the writ petition against main award has been dismissed on 13.02.2008, exercise of alternative option by the employer under the main award stands justified. In any case the amount in pursuance of the said option having already been accepted by the workman (on 16.11.1985 according to learned counsel for employer), there was no occasion to proceed further with recovery of subsequent wages or any amount on the application of the workman. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Writ of prohibition is issued restraining the respondent No.1 from proceeding further with the cases or any other case, which may be initiated by respondent workman Rajendra Singh in pursuance of award dated 31.07.1985.