Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Steel Authority Of India Limited vs Workmen Of Steel Authority Of India ... on 14 December, 2017
Author: Debasish Kar Gupta
Bench: Debasish Kar Gupta
1 4 14.12.17
F.M.A. 1369 of 2017 sn (C.A.N. 8708 of 2017) STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED VS. WORKMEN OF STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED.
Mr. Amit Prokash Lahiri .... for the Applicant Mr. L.K. Gupta..Sr.Adv.
Mr. Soumya Mazumder Mr. Amitava Roy ..for the Appellant This is an application arising out of this appeal for passing further orders.
Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties as also after considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we find that a judgement dated January 17, 2017 as also an award dated September 4, 2009 are the subject matter of challenge in this appeal. While considering the application for staying of operation of the above judgement and the aforesaid award, a co-ordinate bench of this Court, after staying the same gave further directions, which are as follows :-
"It is needless to mention that in the meantime if any worker has retired, resigned or no more in this 2 earthly world, his retiral benefits or death benefit shall be paid in accordance with law by the authority to him or his legal representatives, as the case may be, subject to the decision of the litigation."
It is further submitted by Mr. Lahiri, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant that in the event of retirement, resignation or death of any of the workmen during the pendency of this appeal, there may be a confusion with regard to the quantum of money payable to them in terms of the order dated July 26, 2017 passed by a co-ordinate bench of this Court in connection with the application for stay bearing C.A.N. 2784 of 2017.
After considering the fact and circumstances of this case, we find that Mr. Lahiri, in his usual fairness, submits before us that no such occasion has arisen as yet. Therefore, in view of any case of retirement, resignation or death of any workmen during the pendency of this appeal, there will be an occasion to consider such confusion as recorded hereinabove.
3
No order is required to be passed for verification and/or modification of the order dated July 26, 2017 at this stage.
This application stands disposed of. There will be, however, no order as to costs.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis.
(Debasish Kar Gupta, J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf, J.) 4 5