Telangana High Court
Raja Kumaraswamy vs The Chairman And Managing Director on 19 August, 2025
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION No.28993 OF 2022
ORDER:
Heard Sri Ch.Venkat Raman, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri P.Sri Harsha Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
"...to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No. 1 to 4 in not issuing back wages with interest from the date of removal till the date of reappointment along with all statutory benefits as per the Mines Act and the National Coal Wages Agreement is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the National Coal Wages Agreement guidelines and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and unconstitutional and to pass..."
3. It is specific case of the petitioner that the action of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in not releasing back wages with interest from the date of removal till the date of reappointment along with all statutory benefits as per the Mines Act and the National Coal Wages Agreement is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the 2 SN, J National Coal Wages Agreement guidelines and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India
4. PERUSED THE RECORD.
A. The relevant portion of the order dated 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad pertaining to the Industrial Dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent herein is extracted hereunder:-
"It is ordered that the workman Sri Rajkumar Swamy be taken into service as fresh employee i.e, Badli filler in Cat.I.,on initial basic pay without back wages and continuity of service, subject to medical fitness by the company Medical Board and the workman be kept under probation for a period of one year. The management is also directed to take an undertaking of good behaviour from the workman at the time of his posting."
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION:-
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the action of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 in not releasing back wages with interest from the date of petitioner's removal, till the date of reappointment along with all statutory benefits as per the Mines Act and National Coal Wages Agreement is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the National Coal 3 SN, J Wages Agreement guidelines and therefore, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner is entitled for the relief as prayed for by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition.
6. Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents draws attention of this Court to the Award, dated 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad and contends that Award of the Labour Court, dated 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 did not permit grant of back wages with interest to the petitioner herein from the date of removal till the date of reappointment along with all statutory benefits and therefore, the writ petitioner is not entitled for the relief as prayed for by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition, since the respondents cannot go beyond the Award passed by the Labour Court on 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad.
4
SN, J
7. Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents however contends that it is open to the petitioner to challenge the Award, dated 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad.
8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner does not dispute the said submission made by the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent corporation.
9. Taking into consideration:-
a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.
b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
c) The contents of the order dated 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court 5 SN, J at Hyderabad pertaining to the Industrial Dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent herein
d) The fact that the 4th respondent cannot go beyond the Award, dated 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad,, which clearly directed the 4th respondent herein to take the petitioner into the service as a fresh employee i.e., Badli filler in Category-I on initial basic pay without back wages and continuity of service subject to the medical fitness by the company medical board.
The Writ Petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to pursue the remedies as are available to the petitioner against the Award, dated 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad, since the relief as prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted and no direction can be issued contrary to the Award, dated 22.09.2016 passed in Industrial dispute L.C.No.132/2006 on the file of the 6 SN, J Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad, unless the same is challenged before appropriate Authority. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
___________________________ MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA Date: 19.08.2025 ktm 7 SN, J HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.28993 OF 2022 Dated : 19.08.2025 ktm