Allahabad High Court
U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad vs Deputy Labour Commissioner, Agra ... on 28 October, 2023
Author: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
Bench: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:205598 Court No. - 9 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31578 of 2023 Petitioner :- U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Respondent :- Deputy Labour Commissioner, Agra Region, Agra And 19 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nipun Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jagdish Chandra Sharma Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Heard Sri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anurag Ojha, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 20.
This writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 24.04.2023 passed by Deputy Labour Commissioner, Agra Region, Agra requiring Collector, Agra to recover the amount pursuant to award made on 18.06.1997.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the contesting respondent had approached the labour court and award was made on 18.06.1997 wherein the labour court had required the opposite party to be regularised with payment of salary admissible to regular employees. The award was put to challenge before this Court through Writ-C No. 14047 of 1998 which was disposed of 21.07.2016 and following order was passed:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.K. Yadav learned counsel for the respondent workmen.
Present writ petition has been filed challenging the award of the labour Court dated 18.6.1997 passed in Adjudication Case No. 101 of 1990 whereby the labour court has directed to regularise and confirm all the 54 daily wager/muster role employees.
In view of the order dated 02.7.2013 supplementary affidavit dated 14.7.2013 has been filed by the petitioner and paragraph-6 of the said supplementary affidavit is quoted below:-
"6. That it would not be out of place to mention here that as and when a substantive post became vacant and respondent workmen fulfill their eligibility they have been considered for regularization as per policy in accordance with rules and regulations framed under the law"
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that 20 workmen have already been regularised and the remaining workmen shall be regularised as and when the posts fall vacant.
Sri S.K. Yadav learned counsel appearing for the respondent workmen has no objection and he states that the writ petition may be disposed of as undertaking has been given by the petitioners that they shall regularise the services of the remaining respondent workmen .
In view of the above, present petition is disposed of. No order as to costs."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that award of the labour court had merged with order passed by writ Court and on the undertaking given by counsel for the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad which was accepted by counsel appearing for the workmen, the writ petition was disposed of on the strength that they shall be regulariged in services. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, now recovery certificate has been initiated for recovering and paying the amount due as per the award.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the workmen submitted that award never merged with order of writ Court and only on the affidavit filed by petitioner, U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad that counsel for the workmen had accepted the proposal of the petitioner that writ petition be disposed of that workmen be regularised as other workmen had already been regularised. According to him, the award as to the extent of payment of salary admissible to regular employees was never modified by writ Court.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, I find that the writ Court had not modified the award dated 18.06.1997 and the amount awarded to the workmen has to be paid.
No case for interference is made out.
The writ petition is misconceived and stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.10.2023 V.S.Singh