RSRTC, JAIPUR Vs. LABOUR COURT, KOTA & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the workmen. In brief, the facts of the case are that the respondent-workman Kan Singh had challenged his termination order 24.1.1983 in a writ petition before this Hon'ble Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 231/83 along with other workmen against whom similar orders were passed. All these petitions were jointly decided by a common order of this Court dated March 12,1984. This Court held that the termination of the respondent workmen and other similar workmen was invalid as the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') were not followed. Consequently, the termination orders were set-aside and all the workmen, including the respondent Kan Singh were ordered to be reinstated. For the back wages till reinstatement, the matter was left on the workmen to seek their remedy u/s. 33(c)(2) of the Act.

(2.) Thereafter, the workman, respondent No. 2 moved an application u/s. 33(c)(2) of the Act claiming Rs. 25,278/- as back wages for the period claimed in schedule A; appended to the application before the Labour Court, Kota. The learned Tribunal (Labour Court, Kota) awarded Rs. 9,083/- to be paid to the workmen for the period January, 1983 to March, 1984, after allowing the permissible deductions.

(3.) The only contention made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the learned Judge of the Labour Court committed an error in awarding Rs. 2,400/- as uniform allowance for the period, as there was no direction of this Court while deciding the earlier writ petition on March 12,1984. In my view, this argument has no substance. Firstly, no such objection was raised before the Labour Court, as it is clear 'from the impugned order dated 9.1.1991. The learned counsel, otherwise also, could not show me that the respondent workman was not entitled to get the uniform allowance.