Industrial Disputes Act | Workman Not Entitled To Section 17(B) Wages After Attaining Age Of Superannuation: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a workman is not entitled to wages under Section 17(B) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, after attaining the age of superannuation, as the provision operates only during the period when the employer–employee relationship subsists.For context, Section 17(B) mandates employers to pay full last-drawn wages to a workman during the pendency of appeal against a reinstatement award.Justice Renu Bhatnagar observed that Section 17(B) is an interim measure intended to provide last drawn wages to a workman during the pendency of proceedings challenging an award of reinstatement, and its applicability presupposes that the workman is otherwise entitled to continue in service.The bench rejected the Respondent-workman's argument that the wage be continued despite superannuation, in view of his financial hardship and continued unemployment. “While the Court is not unmindful of the hardship pleaded, the entitlement under Section 17(B) is statutory in nature and must be governed by the parameters laid down by binding precedents. Considerations of hardship, howsoever compelling, cannot extend the operation of Section 17(B) beyond what the law permits,” it said.The Court was dealing with an application filed by LIC seeking modification of an order directing it to pay to the respondent (Typist) last drawn wages or minimum wages, till the disposal of its writ petition against reinstatement award.The Corporation contended that since the Respondet had attained the age of superannuation, payment under Section 17(B) should cease.Reliance was placed on Delhi Transport Corporation v. Ramesh Chander (2012) where the High Court held that the benefit of under Section 17(B) is available to a workman only till the age of superannuation and not thereafter. Accordingly, the Court held that although an award of reinstatement results in the workman being deemed to be in service during the pendency of proceedings, such deemed continuance cannot extend beyond the period during which the workman would otherwise be entitled to remain in service under the applicable service conditions.Appearance: Mr. Atul K. Bandhu, Ms. Kusum, Advs for Petitioner; Mr. Lakshay Sawhney, Adv for RespondentCase Title: Life Insurance Corporation of India v. G.K. NijhawanCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 183Case No.: W.P.(C) 163/2017Click here to read order

Industrial Disputes Act | Workman Not Entitled To Section 17(B) Wages After Attaining Age Of Superannuation: Delhi High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags