S.33C Industrial Disputes Act Is For Execution Of Award, Labour Court Can't Enter Adjudicatory Process To Decide Disputed Facts: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has made it clear that Section 33C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is for the purpose of execution of the award or dealing with the pre-existing right or benefit arising out of the settlement of a workman against his employer. The same does not make way for a Labour Court to enter into an adjudicatory process, giving a finding on disputed facts between the parties.The Bench comprising Justice AY Kogje was hearing a challenge to a Labour Court's order directing the Petitioner-organisation to pay full wages to the respondent-workman from 2006-2013. Brief facts of the case are that in 2006, a Labour Court had ordered reinstatement of the Respondent-Workman in Petitioner-organization, with 25% backwages. The Petitioner submitted that the Respondent-workman failed to join his duty at the plant in Orissa and 7 years later, had filed the present claim before the Labour Court, seeking recovery of entire salary from 2006 to 2013. The workman claimed that he indeed travelled to Orissa to avail reinstatement but was not permitted to resume duty.The Labour Court allowed the workman's claim.Before the High Court, it was averred that the issue whether Respondent joined duty or not is a disputed fact and the Labour Court had committed jurisdictional error in entering the adjudicatory process in the application which was exclusively reserved for the purpose of execution of the award under Section 33C(2) of the ID Act. Per contra, the Respondent submitted that the Labour Court had considered the application under Sec 33 of the Act and gave due opportunity to the Petitioner-organisation to prove its case that the workman was reinstated in the plant. The workman also presented his railway ticket to show that he had travelled to Orissa while the Petitioner-organisation had not provided any evidence to falsify the workman's case. Justice AY Kogje noted that it was a matter of dispute between the parties as to whether the workman had arrived in Orissa to join the plant towards reinstatement. This dispute had to be undertaken for adjudication. However, Sec 33C allows only for the execution of the award or deals with the pre-existing right or benefit arising out of the settlement of a workman against his employer. Reliance was placed on M/s. Bombay Chemical Industries v/s. Deputy Labour Commissioner and Another to observe: "As per the settled proposition of law, in an application under Section 33(C)(2)of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Labour Court has no jurisdiction and cannot adjudicate dispute of entitlement or the basis of the claim of workmen. It can only interpret the award or settlement on which the claim is based. As held by this Court in the case of Ganesh Razak and Anr. (supra), the labour court's jurisdiction under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act is like that of an executing court." Accordingly, it held that the order of the Labour Court was beyond the powers under Sec 33C(2) of the Act. Case No.: C/SCA/7721/2018 Case Title: SADBHAV ENGINEERING LIMITED v/s GHANSHYAMBHAI B PANDYA & 1 other(s)Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 228 Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

S.33C Industrial Disputes Act Is For Execution Of Award, Labour Court Can't Enter Adjudicatory Process To Decide Disputed Facts: Gujarat High Court

PRIYANKA PREET

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

PRIYANKA PREET

S.33C Industrial Disputes Act Is For Execution Of Award, Labour Court Can't Enter Adjudicatory Process To Decide Disputed Facts: Gujarat High Court

PRIYANKA PREET

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

PRIYANKA PREET

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers