MANAGEMENT, PABHOJAN TEA ESTATE Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. D.P. Chaliha, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. D.C. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 4. Heard also Ms. V.L. Sinha, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State respondents.

(2.) THE relevant facts, which have given rise to the present revision, are, in brief, thus. The respondent No. 4, while working as a clerk in Pabhojan Tea Estate, was dismissed from service with effect from 16.6.1981. On a dispute having been raised by the union, which represented the respondent No. 4 as workman, a reference was made to the Labour Court of Assam at Dibrugarh for decision by the State Government under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act. This reference gave rise to Reference Case No. 04/1982. The Labour Court delivered its award on 24.6.1987, whereby it held the workman not guilty of the charge and directed his reinstatement. On his reinstatement, the workman did not, however, rejoin his service and demand that lie be paid his back wages and dues before he rejoins in service. As the Management did not make payment of the alleged dues of the workman, the workman carried the matter to the Bakijai Officer. The Bakijai Officer, i.e., the respondent No. 3 accordingly issued a certificate, dated 19.10.2001. It is the certificate, so issued, which is under challenge, in the present writ petition, by the employer.

(3.) WHAT is enforceable against the employer is an award. The award in the present case, does not, admittedly, make the employer liable to pay the back wages to the workman. In such circumstances, the workman could not have demanded and the respondent No. 3 herein could not have issued the impugned recovery certificate. The recovery officer can only recover such amount, which is issued by the competent authority. The Recovery Officer himself is not competent to issue a recovery certificate.