UNION OF INDIA Vs. COMPETENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the correctness, validity and propriety of the order dated September 21, 1987 (Annexure-9) passed by the Competent Authority under Payment of Wages Act, Jabalpur.

(2.) The respondent No. 2 challenging the illegal deductions made from his salary had filed disputes No. 14/84 and 15/84 which were allowed in favour of the respondent No. 2. The final orders were passed on April 14, 1984 and December 17, 1985. The competent authority finding in favour of the respondent No. 2 held that the deductions on the ground of wrong/forged claim of LTC were illegal. The competent authority directed that the respondent No. 2 was entitled to an order in his favour. The said orders passed by the competent authority were not challenged before the Appellate Court and were permitted to attain finality. As the petitioner was not obeying the directions issued by the competent authority and was not making the payment to the workman, he moved an application under Section 21(2) of the Payment of Wages Act and prayed to the competent authority that the present petitioner be directed to make the payments to him. The competent authority raised various objections. The competent authority after hearing the panics held that the present petitioner was bound to make payment in accordance with the final order already passed on December 17, 1985. Being dissatisfied by this order, the present petitioner has filed the present petition.

(3.) Shri Namdeo learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the orders passed in Case. Nos. 14/84 and 15/84 were bad and therefore, the same could nor be executed by the compe-tent authority nor the competent authority could direct the petitioner to make the payments. He submits that an illegal order cannot be executed, then he tried to challenge the correctness, validity and propriety of the earlier orders but this Court did not permit him to raise his arguments because the said order passed in the year 1985 could be made a subject of the appeal but the petitioner did not choose to file an appeal. On the other hand Shri Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that the Court only has to see whether the competent authority was within its jurisdiction while executing the order already passed by the Court,