Patna High Court - Orders
Larsen & Tubro Ltd. & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 25 June, 2014
Author: Jyoti Saran
Bench: Jyoti Saran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6825 of 2014
======================================================
Larsen & Tubro Ltd. & Ors
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar & Ors
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Archna Sinha
For the Respondent-State : Dr. Anshuman, SC-14 with
Mr. Kuber Pathak, AC to SC-14
For the private Respondents : Mr. Pramod Manbansh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
ORAL ORDER
4 25-06-2014Heard Ms. Archna Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Dr. Anshuman, learned Standing Counsel No.14 and Mr. Pramod Manbansh, learned counsel appearing for the workman.
The petitioners, a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956, have filed this writ petition praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 30.1.2014 as contained in Annexure-5, whereby the claim of the respondent no.3 under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been allowed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner, Munger Division, Begusarai. The writ petition is accompanied with an interlocutory application bearing I.A. No.3054 of 2014 seeking interim relief.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6825 of 2014 (4) dt.25-06-2014 2
Although under section 30(1) of the Act, the remedy available to a person aggrieved by an order passed by a Commissioner under 'the Act' is by way of appeal but the present writ petition was filed by the petitioners questioning the order on the anvil of jurisdiction. With reference to a notification bearing S.O. No.1188 L & E dated 31.12.1991 learned counsel submits that the presiding officer of the concerned labour court has been declared as an ex-officio Commissioner under 'the Act' to deal with all contested cases and the Rules framed thereunder and an officer other than the presiding officer of the labour court has been declared as ex-officio Commissioner under 'the Act' to deal with the non-contested cases but the Deputy Labour Commissioner without appreciating this position has proceeded to adjudicate on the matter. It is thus sought to be canvassed that the order is without jurisdiction hence the writ petition would lie before this Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of maintainability and the interim relief and perused the records.
The written statement filed on behalf of the petitioners has been placed at Annexure-3 to the writ petition in which neither the status of the workman has been contested by Patna High Court CWJC No.6825 of 2014 (4) dt.25-06-2014 3 the petitioners nor his claim is put to challenge rather the claim is solely contested on its quantum. The moment an employer admits to the position that the claimant is a workman and pursuant to an accident the claim has been presented, what would be the quantum cannot be held to be a 'contested' matter and hence in such matters the Deputy Labour Commissioner was fully within jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.
In the circumstances, the remedy for the petitioners is to approach the forum of appeal. Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to convert this writ petition to a miscellaneous appeal within four weeks from today, failing which this writ petition shall stand rejected without further reference to the Bench.
(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/-
U T