LAWS(BOM)-2004-2-164

RAJAN BHAGAWANT KEDAR Vs. HMP ENGINEERS LTD

Decided On February 10, 2004
RANJAN BHAGWANT KEDAR Appellant
V/S
HMP ENGINEERS LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS seek a Writ of Mandamus directing respondent No. 4 to initiate proceedings against respondent No. 1 for recovery of Rs. 24,34,773/- mentioned in recovery Certificate dated June 26, 1998. We are informed by learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 that respondent No. 2 is dead. Respondent No. 3 is not present, though served. We have heard Ms. Gayatri Singh learned counsel for petitioner, Mr. Kharawala for respondent No. 1 and Ms. M. Kajle AGP for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

(2.) PETITIONER No. 1 is employee of respondent No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 is a registered Trade Union representing employees of respondent No. 1. It is their case that respondent No. 1 took over the undertaking of Rallis India Ltd. by an agreement dated April 4, 1991. Petitioners had filed Complaint (ULP)No. 477 of 1997. On December 11, 1997 an order was passed by Industrial Court on an undertaking given by respondent No. 1 company that salaries for the month of May 1997 will be paid to all the employees. The company has failed to comply with this undertaking. It is the case of the petitioners that company did not make payment of salaries and therefore, a criminal complaint was filed before labour Court, Thane. Even when this complaint was heard respondent No. 1 was not present. In the meanwhile, petitioners filed miscellaneous Application (ULP) No. 37 of 1997 under Section 50 of the Maharashtra recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. By order dated June 23, 1998, the Industrial Court issued a Recovery Certificate.

(3.) THE procedure prescribed by law of forwarding such a certificate to Collector for recovery of the dues mentioned therein as arrears of Land Revenue from the defaulter was initiated by forwarding said Certificate to the collector. However, the grievance is that no steps have been initiated by the Collector to recover the dues. Consequently, petitioners have not received any amounts which were due and payable as salary for the work and services rendered by them.