PRANTOSH SINHA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prantosh, an ex-employee of Kusum Products Limited (hereinafter referred to as the "employee") has filed W.P. No. 6553 (W) of 1999 in the Appellate Side of this Court seeking enforcement of an order dated 27th April, 1993 passed by the Joint Secretary, Government of West Bengal, under section 15 of the West Bengal Shops & Establishment Act, 1963; whereas Kusum Products Limited (hereinafter referred to as the "employer") has filed W.P. No. 1468 of 1999 in the Original Side of this Court challenging the validity and legality of the said order as well as vires of section 15 of the West Bengal Shops & Establishment Act, 1963.

(2.) The employee joined the services of the employer on 8th August, 1965 and was confirmed on 8th February, 1966. Subsequent thereto the employee got several promotions. On 30th July, 1984 the employee became the Regional Sales Manager of the employer. On 11th May, 1991 the employee was granted a special increment. On 22nd December, 1991 the employee was hospitalised for having suffered a heart attack. After release from the hospital the employee joined on 19th January, 1992. Subsequent thereto on 22nd February, 1992 the employee was advised bed rest, which advice was duly communicated to the Executive Director of the employer. On 25th February, 1992 the employee received a telegram whereby and where under his services were terminated. The employee then challenged such termination of service under section 15 of the West Bengal Shops & Establishment Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the said "Act"), which challenge was contested by the employer and ultimately the order in question was passed. By that the employer was directed to reinstate the employee with full back wages.

(3.) The employer then filed a writ petition in this Court which was registered as Matter No. 1437 of 1993. In that writ petition same or similar prayers, as have been made in the aforementioned writ petition of the employer, were made on almost identical facts, circumstances, grounds and pleadings. In that writ petition certain interim orders were passed. For non-grant of interim orders to the satisfaction of the employer, it also preferred an appeal in connection with the said writ petition. In that appeal also from time to time certain interim orders were passed. Ultimately, however, on 27th February, 1997 the said writ petition was dismissed for default. Despite knowledge of the said order of dismissal, no application was filed for recalling of the said order of dismissal and for restoration of the said writ petition. There is no dispute that when the said writ petition was dismissed, the employer was not granted any opportunity to file a fresh writ petition on the self-same cause of action.