Orissa High Court
Paradip Port Trust vs Central Government Industrial ..... ... on 2 July, 2024
Bench: Arindam Sinha, M.S.Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.2016 of 2022 & W.P.(C) No.41559 of 2021
W.P.(C) no.2016 of 2022
Paradip Port Trust ..... Petitioner
Represented by Adv.-
Mr. S. K. Padhi, Sr.
Advocate along with A.P.
Das, Advocate
-versus-
Central Government Industrial ..... Opp. Parties
Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Bhubaneswar and another
Represented by Adv.-
Mr. A. Mohanty, Sr.
Advocate along with D.
Mohant, Advocate for
O.P.No.2
Mr.P.P. Behera, CGC
W.P.(C) no.41559 of 2021
Paradip Port & Dock Mazdoor ..... Petitioner
Union
Represented by Adv.-
Mr. A. Mohanty, Sr.
Advocate along with D.
Mohant, Advocate
-versus-
Chairman, Paradip Port Trust & ..... Opp. Parties
others
Represented by Adv.-
Mr. S. K. Padhi, Sr.
Advocate along with
A.P. Das, Advocate
Page 1 of 5
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO
ORDER
02.07.2024 Order No.
06. 1. Mr. Padhi, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner (Paradip Port Trust) in WP(C) no.2016 of 2022. His client was first party management named in award dated 17th December, 2020, under challenge.
2. He submits, it cannot be disputed that the workers were engaged by the Management Committee. Said committee was not a party in the reference.
3. The Management Committee constituted of representatives from the workmen, their employer (clearing and forwarding agency) and one full time officer from his client to act as Chairman of the committee. Further assistance to the committee was rendered by his client on deputing another officer to act as Secretary to the committee. He submits, the Management Committee in its wisdom decided non-payment of variable dearness allowance (VDA) of workers engaged to work in the port area, in respect of clearing and Page 2 of 5 forwarding cargo handled, so as to attract more business. The workers were never engaged by his client. In the circumstances, there could not have been made direction upon his client to take steps for making payment of the dues, purportedly arisen in the period when the VDA stood frozen.
4. On query from Court, Mr. Mohanty learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the union submits, the Management Committee came to be formed under Paradip Port Clearing, Forwarding & Handling Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1994. Objects and scope of the scheme are clear from paragraphs, 1 and 3 thereof. Paragraph-3 is reproduced below.
"Scope of the scheme:
The Management Committee shall undertake the supply of clearing, forwarding and handling workers at the prescribed rates to the listed employers for clearing, forwarding and handling operations as are decided by the Committee in the area notified as Port area. Provided that when there is shortage of workers, people experienced in the line shall be taken on temporary basis for the work provisionally as per the terms and conditions to be specified by the Management Committee."Page 3 of 5
On further query Mr. Mohanty submits, members of his client were engaged by the Management Committee.
5. We see from impugned award, the CGIT-cum-Labour Court found non-payment/withholding of disbursement of VDA between 1st November, 2000 to 31st December, 2011 is not legal and justified. It was held to be an act on the part of the Management Committee in violation of section 9-A of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The provision is in respect of notice of change in conditions of service applicable to any workman. The change effected by an employer must be upon notice to the workman. Question to be adjudicated in this writ petition is whether petitioner, not being the employer, was obliged to give notice under section 9-A.
6. We also see from schedule of reference order dated 13th June, 2014 there is mention of an award passed by the Chief Labour Commissioner, New Delhi in year 1986. Controversy between the parties in the reference appears to be non-payment/withholding of disbursement of VDA between 1st November, 2000 to 31st December, 2011. We require assistance also on whether the award of year 1986 has any bearing on the controversy. Page 4 of 5
7. Joint submission at the Bar is for CGIT-cum-Labour Court record to be called for. We accept the submission. The CGIT-cum- Labour Court record /scanned copy be produced for purpose of adjudication of the writ petitions.
8. List on 23rd July, 2024. Interim order to continue till the next date of hearing.
(Arindam Sinha) Judge (M.S. Sahoo) Judge Dutta/Gs Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AJIT KUMAR DUTTA Reason: Authentication Location: ohc Page 5 of 5 Date: 03-Jul-2024 19:04:51