Steel Authority Of India Limited vs Union Of India And Ors

I.A. No.11413/2019 in W.P.(L) No.1904/2018:

The present interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner-Management, praying inter alia to stay the implementation, operation

and execution of the impugned award dated 26th December, 2017.

Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner-Management, submits that the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad

vide impugned award dated 26th December, 2017 passed in Ref. No.50 of 2011 has erroneously ordered for regularization of the concerned contract

workers in phase-wise manner within 30 days of the publication of the award failing which the Management has been directed to pay the back wages

from the date of publication of the award to the concerned workers. It is further submitted that the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal

No.1, Dhanbad also committed an error in passing the order of regularization of the concerned workmen without appreciation of the foundational facts

regarding availability of the respective posts with the petitioner-Management. It is also submitted that the officers of the petitioner-Management are

under threat of prosecution for non-implementation of the impugned award. In this context, a copy of the e-mail communication from the Deputy Chief

Labour Commissioner (C), Dhanbad dated 9th December, 2019 has been brought on record as Annexure-I.A./1 to the present interlocutory

application, wherein it has been informed that in absence of any order of stay against the impugned award, appropriate prosecution shall be launched

against the officers of the petitioner-Management. Subsequently, a letter dated 11/24th December, 2019 has been issued under the signature of the

Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Dhanbad-II to the officers of the petitioner-Management calling upon them to show cause as to why legal

action should not be initiated against them as provided under Section 29 read with Section 32 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned award dated 26th December, 2017 may

be ordered to be stayed.

Mr. Rama Kant Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent-Majdoor Union, submits that the impugned award dated 26th December, 2017 passed by

the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad is perfectly justified, as the concerned workmen were engaged by the petitioner-

Management through the contractor for undertaking prohibited nature of job.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the relevant materials available on record, the implementation, operation and execution of

the impugned award dated 26th December, 2017 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad in Ref. No.50 of 2011 is

hereby stayed.

I.A. No.11413 of 2019 stands disposed of.

I.A. No.5750/2019 in W.P.(L) No.1904/2018:

The present interlocutory has been filed on behalf of the respondent-Majdoor Union for fixing an early date of hearing of the writ petition, being W.P.

(L) No.1904 of 2018.

Since the writ petition itself has been taken up on board, no order is required to be passed in the present interlocutory application and the same is,

accordingly, disposed of.

W.P.(L) No.1904 of 2018:

Put up this case under the heading “For Admissionâ€​ after four weeks.

W.P.(L) No.1658 of 2015:

Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner-Management, submits that in view of the award dated 26th December, 2017 passed by the

Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad in Ref. No.50 of 2011, the present writ petition has become infructuous and the same may,

accordingly, be disposed of.

In view of the said submission, W.P.(L) No.1658 of 2015 is disposed of as infructuous.