AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mr. Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, C.J.—The appeal is barred by limitation. The delay is of three days. As this case involves determination of payment to the workmen, we have decided to consider the appeal on merits.
This is an appeal by the employer challenging an interim order passed by the Hon''ble Single Judge directing payment of current wages to the workmen from February 8, 2016, that is, the date on which they were reinstated, until further orders.
An award was passed by the Labour Court directing reinstatement of the workmen. The award has been challenged before the Hon''ble Single Judge and the writ petition is pending. During the pendency of the writ petition, the Hon''ble Single Judge granted stay of the operation of the award, subject to the result of the writ petition. Nevertheless, the employer had reinstated the workmen.
The workmen are performing the duties along with their other colleagues, but they are receiving Rs. 8,500 (Rupees eight thousand and five hundred) only, per month, as Rs. 8,500 (Rupees eight thousand and five hundred) only, was their last drawn remuneration on the date of their terminations.
Mr. S. Vijayashankar, learned senior advocate appearing in support of the appeal, submits, that the workmen are entitled to payment of an amount, which was last drawn by them at the time of their termination.
It is not that the order was passed in an application under section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The Management had reinstated them subject, however, to the result of the writ petition. As the workmen are performing their duties along with their other colleagues, they are entitled to payment at par with their colleagues.
A workman is entitled to receive the current wages and cannot be forced to receive wages, which were paid to him previously.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the order impugned.
The application for condonation or delay in filing the appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is, also, dismissed.
In view of dismissal of this appeal, the pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and is, also, dismissed.
We make no order as to costs.