BOKARO STEEL RASHTRIYA MAZDOOR SANGH Vs. THE MANAGEMENT OF BOKARO STEEL PLANT, STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel for the appellant submitted that there is a parity in duties to be performed by the appellant and other similarly situated employees/workmen working in Civil Engineering, Town Administration Department and Raw Material Department and hence, no error was committed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bokaro Steel City in passing an order in favour of the appellant in Reference Case No. 12 of 1998. In fact, looking to the duties to be performed by the Field Assistants where the appellants are working and where other Field Assistants are working in other departments, the nature of the duties is absolutely similar and hence, they are entitled to similar pay scale i.e. Rs. 330 -440/ -.

(2.) Counsel for the appellant has also relied upon the tripartite agreement entered into between the Field Assistants of Town Administration Department, Field Assistants of Civil Engineering Department and respondent -Management. On the basis of this Tripartite agreement also the arguments has been canvassed by the counsel for the appellant that they are entitled to similar pay scale, which is given to the Field Assistants of Town Administration Department and at par with the Field Assistants of Civil Engineering Department. These aspects of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while deciding W.P.(L) No. 6999 of 2002 vide judgment and order dated 17th October, 2008 and hence, the said judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge may be quashed and set aside.

(3.) Counsel for the respondent submitted that the appellant, who is original respondent in W.P.(L) No. 6999 of 2002 is seeking similar pay which were prevailing in other departments of the respondent. Though there is no parity of the recruitment process, though there is no parity in the qualification, though there is no parity of the duties performed by them in different departments and after getting promotion in their respective department after several years the industrial dispute was raised under Industrial Disputes Act, 1948 and the reference was preferred being Reference Case No. 12 of 1998, which was allowed by the Labour Court vide award dated 10th August, 2001 against which a writ petition bearing W.P.(L) No No. 6999 of 2002 was instituted by the respondent, which was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 17th October, 2008 and hence, the original respondent has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.