KRIPA NAND JHA Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to pay Wages for weekly day of rest from December, 2005 to June, 2007.

(2.) Petitioner is a permanent employee of the respondent No. 1 and was appointed on the post of clerk on 11-3-1965. It has been stated that the petitioner worked to the satisfaction of all the concerned and no complaint was ever made against him. Petitioner was posted as Office Superintendent in Sendra Bansjora Colliery since February, 2001 and has been looking after Despatch section (Coal). The service condition of the petitiner is governed by Mines Act, 1952. It has been stated that the respondent had been taking work from the petitioner for all seven days and was not being allowed Compensatory days of rest. However, he was being paid twice his normal wages in lieu of weekly day of rest from December, 2005 till June, 2007. The said Compensatory was not paid to the petitioner, he preferred several representations. The petitioner was transferred from Sendra Bansjora Colliery to Tetulmari Colliery by office order dated 9/10-8-2005. It has been further stated that due to shortage of man power the petitioner has worked on all days including Sundays from December, 2005 till June, 2007 but he has not been paid twice his normal wages in lieu of weekly day of rest in spite of his best efforts. The petitioner was retired w.e.f. 1-7-2007 but though several representations was preferred but the same has not been looked into neither any payment has been done. The petitioner has challenged the non-payment of his compensation amount by way of this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Vikash Kumar, submits that the petitioner is entitled for compensation of wages for weekly day of rest rom December, 2005 till June 2007. In view of the provisions as led in Sections 28 and 29 of the Mines Act, 1952 which deals with Compensatory days of rest. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously urges that though several representations were filed but till date the respondent did not care to pay the amount for which he has entitled in accordance with law. It is also submitted that the petitioner was retired on 1-7-2007 but till date the amount has not been paid.