FATIK MAHTO Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the Court. -In this appeal by a detailed order dated 5.02.2009 it has been held that Regional Labour Commissioner. Dhanbad instead of taking task of identification of the workmen shifted the burden to the authorities of the BCCL in his order and thereafter this Court directed that one officer from the side of the administration preferably Sub Divisional Officer. Dhanbad and one of the respondents officer of the higher rank so nominated by respondents BCCL. shall assist the Regional Labour Commissioner. Dhanbad for identification of the genuine person. 'In pursuance of this order, the exercise of identification was completed, and in view of the consent given in order dated 15.02.2009, the BCCL has already re -instated these three appellants. However, the question of award of backwages is only issue now survives as the order dated 15.02.2009 is in fact a consent order as consented by the respondents also.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents drew our attention to the order dated 15.09.2009 whereby Interlocutory Applications being I.A. No. 1902 of 2009 and I.A. No. 2257 of 2009 was decided and backwages as interim relief was denied.

(3.) SINCE the interim relief, as prayed for, could not have been allowed vide order dated 15.09.2009, the relief of bat k - wages were denied to the appellants which is no bar against the grant of same relief while deciding the Letters Patent Appeal finally.