SUPERINTENDING ENGG ZHAKAM PROJECT Vs. RAMESH CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 27. 4. 93, contained in Annexure 18 to the petition, by which the Labour Court allowed the application under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as the I. D. Act") and re- fixed the salary of the respondent-workman as in 1986 and 1988 and directed the petitioner to pay the arrears according. By the said impugned order, some amount of gratuity and retrenchment allowance have, also, been directed to be paid.

(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that respondent-workman had been working with petitioner with effect from 18. 9. 68. A voluntary retirement scheme was floated and respondent-workman opted for it and as a con- sequence his services came to an end in view of the Agreement/settlement dated 3. 12. 88 contained in Annexure 17 to this petition. THE said Settlement provided for the workmen opting for voluntary retirement, retrenchment compensation on their complete service and payment of gratuity and making payment of the said amount prior to their retirement. THE third clause of the said agreement was that after retire- ment, the workmen shall not raise any dispute whatsoever before any Court. In addition to three clauses, above referred, to the Settlement, made it clear that fixation/re-fixation of salary had not been made in 1986 and 1988.

(3.) IN Bombay Gas Company Ltd. vs. Gopal Bhiva & Ors. (2), it was held that Labour Court, in exercise of its power under Section 33-C (2) of the Act would be competent to interpret the award, on the basis of which the claim has been made and it would also be open to it to consider the plea that the award sought to be enforced is a nullity. The proceedings in Section 33-C (2) are analogous to execu- tion proceedings and the Labour Court, which is called-upon to compute, in terms of money, the benefit, is in a position of an executing court. The INdustrial Tribunals dealing with disputes referred to them under Section 10 (1) (d) of the Act are tribunals with a limited jurisdiction as they cannot travel out-side the terms of the reference and deal with matters not included in the reference, subject, of course, to incidental matters which fall within their jurisdiction.