AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.S. Jhaveri, J.—By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the impugned award dated 02.12.1999 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in Reference [IT] No. 182/1991, whereby the Industrial Tribunal has directed the petitioner to pay yearly increment and other related benefits to the respondent.
The short facts of the case are that the respondent was initially appointed on the post of Junior Clerk. Thereafter, the respondent was promoted to the post of Senior Accountant and he was officiating as such at Dhoraji. The respondent worked as such from the period between 1960 to 1962 and thereafter was promoted to the post of Senior Accountant and transferred to Shahpur vide order dated 04/05.10.1962. Thereafter vide order dated 04.11.1962, the respondent was transferred to Gondal. The petitioner however, did not grant benefit of increment during the officiating period. Therefore, the respondent raised a dispute, which was ultimately referred to the Industrial Tribunal, being Reference [IT] No. 182/1991. Before the Labour Court, both the parties adduced evidence and after appreciating the material produced before it, the Industrial Tribunal allowed the reference with the aforesaid directions. Hence, this petition.
Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent had worked on the officiating post and there is a break in service and, therefore, he is not entitled to receive such benefits. However, if such benefit is granted, the respondent will claim seniority and will also seek other benefits for the same. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that there is delay in raising the dispute before the Industrial Tribunal.
From the record it transpires that the respondent had worked on the post of Assistant Accountant continuously for the period between 18.08.1960 to 08.11.1962 and there is no break in the service. Therefore, the respondent is entitled for the benefit of increment for the officiating period. Therefore the Industrial Tribunal has rightly passed the award directing the petitioner to pay yearly increment and other benefits for the officiating period viz. 18.08.1960 to 08.11.1962.
4.1. So far as the contention of delay is concerned, no such contention was raised before the Industrial Tribunal and therefore, same cannot be raised before this Court at this stage.
Looking to the facts of the case, and in view of the fact that the respondent had worked on the officiating post of Assistant Accountant for the period between 18.08.1960 to 08.11.1962, and thereafter was promoted to the said post, the respondent is entitle to receive benefit for the officiating period. The Industrial Tribunal has, therefore, rightly passed the impugned award and no other directions are issued. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given and findings arrived at by the Industrial Tribunal and hence, do not find any reason to interfere with the same.
In the result, the petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.