Punjab State Cooperative Supply And ... vs Workmen Of Markfed Cotton Seed ... on 29 May, 2011

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Punjab State Cooperative Supply And ... vs Workmen Of Markfed Cotton Seed ... on 29 May, 2011

Bench: K. Kannan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

                                   CWP No.16636 of 1989
                                   Date of decision April 29, 2011


Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketting Federation
Ltd.,Chandigarh and another


                                                     .......   Petitioners
                              Versus


Workmen of Markfed Cotton Seed Processing Plant, Gidderbaha and
others

                                                     ........Respondents

CORAM:           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

Present:-        Mr. Arun Nehra, Advocate
                 for the petitioners

                 None for the respondents.


                       ****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No

2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?No K. Kannan, J (oral).

1. The writ petition challenges he award of the Industrial Tribunal directing the Management of the petitioner to pay the monthly allowance which had been withdrawn on account of the application of the provision of ESI Act for the workers in the petitioner Management. The attempt of the authorities to invoke the ESI Act was resisted by the workman by seeking for adjudication under Section 75 of the Employees State Insurance Act before the ESI Court and the Court by its order dated 14.5.1987 declared that the petitioner Management was not covered under the ESI Act.

2. The Labour Court, therefore directed that the workmen were entitled to be paid the medical allowance which the Management was providing for previously and the award was passed declaring the action of the Management in withdrawing the medical allowances as unjustified.

3. It appears that against the decision of the ESI Court holding that the petitioner Management was not attracted to the provisions of the ESI Act, there was an appeal to this Court by the ESI Corporation in FAO No.734 of 1987 which had been dismissed by this Court for non-prosecution on 12.11.2010. The Registry has not reported that any application has been filed subsequently for restoration.

4. The award of the Tribunal under the circumstances would require to be confirmed for as on date there is no scheme of the applicability of the ESI Act to the petitioner-Management and consequently for the period during which the workmen had not been paid the medical allowances at the monthly rate of `50/- as stated by the counsel, a computation shall be made and paid to the workmen. This exercise must be done within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. The above directions are given even while dismissing the writ petition and affirming the award of the Industrial Tribunal. Needless to state that the petitioner Management which has already remitted to the ESI Corporation the contributions due under the Act when the Act was sought to be invoked against the institution, shall be liable to be refunded to the petitioner-Management. It shall be at liberty to approach the Corporation for the refund, independent of its obligation to pay the medical allowance to the workmen already declared entitled.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE April 29, 2011 archana

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court