STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. RASHIDKHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises for adjudication in this writ petition is whether the deductions made by the employer from the salary of the employee pursuant to the liability saddled on the employer as well as the employee to satisfy the claim for compensation under provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 can be sought to be recovered by initiating proceedings under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the said Act) ?

(2.) The respondent herein was engaged as a driver with the Irrigation Department of the State Government. On 09/04/1989 when the respondent was driving a Tipper belonging to the Irrigation Department he gave a dash to one Dilip. As a result of that accident Dilip succumbed to injuries. His parents filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In those proceedings the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal directed the Irrigation Department as well as the driver of the Tipper-respondent herein to jointly and severally pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the claimants therein. After paying that compensation the Irrigation Department deducted an amount of Rs.500/- per month from the salary of the respondent. In that manner an amount of Rs.37,000/- was deducted from the salary of the respondent. He therefore filed an application under Section 33C (2) of the said Act on 06/03/2004 praying that the petitioners be directed to pay an amount of Rs.37,000/- with interest to him. In the written statement it was pleaded that the claim as made under provisions of Section 33C(2) of the said Act was not tenable. It was further pleaded that in view of the joint and several liability of the Department and its driver such deductions were legally made.

(3.) The learned Judge of the Labour Court after considering the material on record came to a conclusion that under the Service Rules of the Irrigation Department, if any deductions were liable to be made from the salary of an employee it was necessary to first hold an enquiry and then make such deductions. Since the amounts were illegally deducted from the salary of the respondent at Rs.500/- per month, he was entitled to receive that amount. Hence by judgment dated 17/07/2010 the learned Judge of the Labour Court directed the petitioners to pay an amount of Rs.34,500/- to the respondent within a period of two months. Being aggrieved the said judgment has been challenged in the present writ petition.