RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This special appeal under Ordinance 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinances, 1949 (for short "the Ordinances of 1949") has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 3.3.2004 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 261 of 2002 by which the learned Single Judge dismissed the application filed by the appellants under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1947").

(2.) The facts giving rise to this special appeal may be summarized as follows : The appellants services were terminated vide order dated 31.3.1992 passed by the respondents and thereafter, the State Government through Notification dated 1.5.1997 referred the following dispute to the Labour Court, Bikaner for adjudication: "Whether the termination of services of workmen Sh. Ram Singh Jat and others on 31.3.92 by the employer Dy. Conservator of Forests, Churu and the Range Forest Officer, Taranagar is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief and amount they are entitled for? Before the Labour Court, Bikaner, the appellants, submitted their claims and the respondents also filed their reply and the Labour Court, Bikaner, after hearing both the parties, passed the judgment and award dated 1.12.2001 in favour of the appellants holding inter alia that the termination of services of the appellants was in contravention of the provisions of Sections 25-F, G and H of the Act of 1947 and, therefore, the appellants were entitled to reinstatement with continuity in service. It was further observed by the Labour Court that since the appellants have not worked with respondents after termination, therefore, they were not entitled for wages for that period and for that, the Labour Court awarded Rs. 2500/- as compensation to each of the appellants, but it was further observed by the Labour Court that the appellants were entitled to wages from the date of award till their reinstatement. Aggrieved from the said judgment and award dated 1.12.2001 passed by the Labour Court, Bikaner, the respondents preferred writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 761 of 2003 before this Court and in that writ petition, this Court vide interim order dated 21.1.2003 ordered that the relief granted by the Labour Court to the extent of full back wages shall remain stayed. During the pendency of the above writ petition, an application under Section 17-B of the Act of 1947 was moved on behalf of the appellants stating inter alia that since from the date of termination of their services on 31.3.1992, the appellants are unemployed and without any means of livelihood and since they have not been reinstated by the respondents in pursuance of the judgment and award of the Labour Court, therefore, the respondents be directed to pay to the appellants salary last drawn by them alongwith the increments and other benefits etc. The learned Single Judge of this Court through impugned order dated 3.3.2004 dismissed the said application filed by the appellants under Section 17-B of the Act of 1947 holding inter alia that he was not inclined to accept that application and by the same order, the interim order granted by this Court on 21.1.2003 was confirmed. Aggrieved from the said order dated 3.3.2004 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, the appellants have preferred this special appeal.

(3.) In this special appeal, the main contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants is that when the appellants have filed affidavits in support of their contention that they are unemployed and without any means of livelihood since the date of termination of their services on 31.3.1992 and the respondents have failed to show that the appellants are gainfully employed anywhere, therefore, in view of this, dismissal of the application under Section 17-B of the Act of the 1947 by the learned Single Judge during the pendency of writ petition was manifestly erroneous one and against the well established principles of law and thus, the impugned order dated 3.3.2004 cannot be sustained and liable to be quashed and set aside.