BIHAR COLLEGE OF PHARMACY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The appellant is challenging the order dated 7.3.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 15055 of 2012 by which the writ application filed by the petitioner has been rejected affirming the order of the Labour Court, Patna dated 19.1.2012 passed in Misc. Case No. 8 of 2005. Kumar Ram Baran, the respondent no.3, claiming to be an employee of the Bihar College of Pharmacy (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Pharmacy College') filed an application under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (in short 'I.D. Act') for computation of arrears of salary which the workman is entitled to receive and the same should be computed in terms of the money.

(3.) The Pharmacy College was established in the year 1979 which was running under the control of Institute of Rural Adult Education and Primary Medical Training. As per claim made by the respondent no.3, the Pharmacy College was engaged in commercial and industrial activities. They were charging heavy fee from the students for imparting them medical education. They were also engaged in purchasing and selling of machineries, equipment tools, plants etc. to general public. The respondent no.3 was appointed as a Clerk by the competent authority. Accordingly, he joined the service in the year 1980. A claim has been made by the respondent no.3 that he has not been paid salary for the period from June, 1990 to April, 1994 amounting Rs. 52,795.10, from September, 1998 to February, 2000 amounting Rs. 63,360.00, from May, 2000 to December, 2000 amounting R. 28,160.00, from June, 2001 to July, 2001 amounting Rs. 7,040.00, from September, 2001 to June, 2002 amounting Rs. 38,000.00 and from November, 2002 to January, 2003 amounting Rs. 11,400.00 and the total amount has been claimed as Rs. 2,00,755.10 and claimed that the respondent no.3 was entitled for payment of salary from Pharmacy College. It has further been stated that when the respondent no.3 made a demand for payment of salary, the authority of the appellant gave an assurance for payment of the same but, ultimately, the respondent no.3 did not receive the amount claimed in the application filed under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act. The case was registered whereafter notice was issued to the appellant, in turn, the Vakalatnama was filed on its behalf on 14.9.2005 but, no show-cause was filed whereafter the Labour Court passed the ex-parte order on 16.1.2006 against the appellant. On 26.4.2007, an application was filed on behalf of the opposite party to recall the ex-parte order which was dismissed on 26.4.2007. Again one application was filed on 26.9.2007 to recall the ex-parte order which was allowed on payment of cost of Rs. 300/- and, accordingly, the ex-parte order was recalled. The Labour Court directed to file show-cause, documents and list of witness but, nothing was filed by the appellant nor the cost of Rs. 300/- was deposited and, ultimately, the appellant vide order dated 25.4.2008 was debarred to file show-cause, documents and list of witnesses. Again an application dated 20.5.2008 was filed by the appellant to recall the order dated 25.4.2008 which was rejected vide order dated 8.8.2008 and the case was fixed for ex-parte argument whereafter one petition was filed again by the appellant for review of the order dated 8.8.2008. The said petition was again rejected vide order dated 1.10.2008 and the case was fixed for ex-parte argument. In the meantime, the appellant filed writ application before this Court being CWJC No. 2792 of 2009 and this Court vide order dated 2.3.2009 stayed the further proceeding of the Misc. Case No. 8 of 2005 and, accordingly, the proceeding was kept in abeyance. The writ petition subsequently vide order dated 30.8.2011 was dismissed for want of prosecution whereafter the Labour Court has passed the order.