Jamil Ahmed v. DTC & Anr.

1. The present writ petition filed by the workman seeks to assail the award dated 15.04.1997 insofar as it directs the respondent to deduct Rs.1500/- per month from the wages payable to the petitioner from the date of his dismissal on 24.03.1988. Under the impugned award, the learned Labour Court held that despite the pendency of Industrial Dispute No.17/88 between the parties, the respondent/management did not prefer an approval application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act before dismissing the petitioner from service on 24.03.1988 which rendered his dismissal void. Consequently the petitioner was held as being entitled to full 2019:DHC:5975 backwages with all consequential benefits and continuity of service. However, in view of the statement made by the petitioner during his cross-examination that he was earning a sum of Rs.900/- to Rs.1500/per month, the Labour Court directed that a sum of Rs.1,500/- per month may be deducted from the total sum of backwages payable to the petitioner.

2. At this stage, it may be noted that the respondent’s challenge to the award has already been negated by this Court and, therefore, insofar as the respondent is concerned, the award has attained finality.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Labour Court has, without any basis, directed a deduction of Rs.1,500/- per month from the backwages payable to the petitioner without appreciating the fact that the petitioner in his crossexamination on 22.11.1994 before the Labour Court truthfully stated that he was performing odd jobs from time to time and was sporadically earning amounts ranging between Rs.900/- to Rs.1,500/per month. He thus, contends that the direction of the Labour Court to deduct an amount of Rs.1,500/- from the petitioner’s monthly salary was wholly perverse and contrary to the record.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that once the petitioner admitted that he was at times earning Rs.1,500/- per month, the Labour Court cannot be faulted for directing the said deduction to be made as the amount which was regularly being earned by the petitioner had to be necessarily deducted from the backwages awarded to him. She therefore, prays that the writ petition be dismissed.

5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance perused the record.

6. Since the entire case hinges on the alleged admission made by the petitioner in his cross-examination, a reference to the said crossexamination may be made at the outset:- “I have got six children. I am doing private job and earning Rs.1000/- to Rs.l500/-p.m. whenever the job is available. Sometimes my earning is Rs.900/- in a month and sometimes is Rs.1000/- and sometimes is Rs.1200/p.m.”

7. A perusal of the aforesaid statement shows that the petitioner had categorically stated that he was performing private jobs to take care of his six dependent children, but there is nothing to show that the petitioner ever admitted that he was earning at least Rs.1,500/- per month, as has been presumed by the learned Labour Court. The petitioner’s stand before the Court in fact, was that he was occasionally earning Rs.900/- and Rs.1,000/- but sometimes he was earning Rs.1,200/- or Rs.1,500/-. I, therefore, find merit in the petitioner’s submission that the direction to deduct Rs.1,500/- per month from the wages payable to the petitioner was unjustified and cannot be sustained. It is, however, evident that as per his own statement, the petitioner was earning at least a sum of Rs.900/- per month and sometimes even higher amounts. In these circumstances, the interest of justice demands that only a sum of Rs.1,000/- per month be deducted from the backwages payable to the petitioner in terms of the impugned award.

8. The writ petition is accordingly allowed and disposed of by modifying the impugned award to the extent that the amount as directed to be deducted from the arrears of monthly wages payable to the petitioner would be treated as Rs.1,000/-, and not Rs.1,500/-, as directed under the impugned Award. The arrears in terms of this order will be released to the petitioner within twelve weeks.

REKHA PALLI, J. NOVEMBER 14, 2019 gm