DIVISIONAL MANAGER CTU & DIRECTOR TRANSPORT UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, petitioner has assailed the award passed by the Labour court dated 18.05.2015 (Annexure P-3).

(2.) Respondent No.2 was appointed as a Helper on 23.02.1980. While working as such, he was involved in a criminal case relating theft of certain materials from the office of the petitioner for which FIR was filed on 31.08.1981. Arising out of the same proceedings he was arrested on 08.09.1981. Consequently, he was placed under suspension. Suspension was revoked on 26.03.1987. In the meanwhile in the criminal proceedings he has been acquitted on 30.09.1985. For the purpose of regulating the suspension period respondent No.2 had appraoched labour court wherein order has been passed in his favour on 16.03.1992 and it was implemented by the petitioner. During the intervening period, juniors were stated to have been promoted to the post of Assistant Fitter and Fitter on 12.02.1985 and 01.05.1987. On this issue respondent no. 2 raised an industrial dispute and it was decided on 06.08.2009. Labour court passed an order in favour of respondent No.2. Petitioner implemented the award of the labour court dated 06.08.2009 while promoting respondent No.2 to the post of Assistant Fitter and Fitter with retrospective date from 12.02.1985 and 01.05.1987 respectively on 28.07.2010. Thereafter, for not extending the monetary benefits from 12.02.1985 and 01.05.1987 in the respective cadre up to 28.07.2010 respondent raised one more dispute which was decided in favour of the respondent on 18.05.2015. Hence the present petition by the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that in the earlier dispute labour court has framed issue whether respondent is entitled to be promoted as Assistant Fitter w.e.f. 12.02.1985 and Fitter w.e.f. 01.03.1989 with consequential relief of pay and other benefits along with interest. Whereas labour court extended the benefit of retrospective promotion. However, no relief has been granted in respect of pay and other benefits along with interest for the intervening period from retrospective promotion to both the cadres. Consequently, explanantion 5 of Section 11 of the CPC is applicable. In other words, respondent cannot approach court time and again in peacemeal relief. It was further submitted that respondent has not worked in the post of Assistant Fitter and Fitter during 1985 and 1989 till 28.07.2010. Consequently, principle of no work no pay is applicable. Hence he is not entitled for pay and other benefits. It was also submitted that having regard to the conduct of the respondent that he was involved in criminal case, he was arrested and placed under suspension and he has been extended the benefit of salary during the suspension period. Therefore, he is not entitled to claim monetary benefits for the retrospective promotion. Thus, labour court has erred in extending the benefits of monetary benefits.