S.R.S.KRISHNAN, PRESIDENT, KALYANPUR CEMENT LTD. Vs. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT.OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.

(2.) The petitioners seek quashing of the order dated 1.7.2006 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Rohtas in Complaint Case No. 57 of 2005 by which it has directed the petitioners to deposit cheque in the Forum regarding dues of the complainant-respondent No. 3 with the Company of which the petitioners are President, General Manager and Director respectively.

(3.) The short facts of the case are that the respondent No. 3 Md. Ishaque filed a complaint case bearing Complaint Case No. 57 of 2005 on 18.5.2005 before the District Consumer Forum for payment of his provident fund, gratuity, salary of 19 months under V.R.S. scheme and payment of medical bills amounting to Rs. 7 lacs in all. His claim was that he was working in Kalyanpur Cement Limited as a Driver of heavy vehicle in the Transport Section and had offered to resign from service on 24.5.2004 under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme which was accepted on 28.5.2004, but his dues had not been paid by the Company. In the said complaint the petitioners were made parties but the petitioner's Company itself was not made an opposite party. The petitioners appeared before the District Consumer Forum and took a stand, inter alia, that the dispute under the complaint petition is between the employee and employer relating to the terms and conditions of services, salaries and perquisites to its employees and such dispute will not amount to consumer dispute and only on the said ground the complaint case should be dismissed as it is outside the jurisdiction of the District Consumer Forum. However, on the merits of the case it was admitted by the petitioners that certain amounts were due to the respondent No. 3 and the petitioners were ready to make payment to the complainant, but instead of accepting the payment he had chosen to enter into a vexatious litigation. Other pleas were also taken. Instead of deciding the question of jurisdiction at the outset the Forum has taken note of the submission that the petitioners are ready to make payment to the complainant and therefore directed them to deposit cheque in the Forum. It is also stated in the order that if the case is not to be disposed of on the basis of non- deposit of cheque in the Forum and as the Forum is expected to decide the case summarily, the opposite parties may raise the legal jurisdiction matter at the time of final hearing of the case. Against the said order the present writ petition is filed.