Telangana High Court
WP/4039/2004 of THE CEMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA PACKING PLANT UNION Vs THE GOVT.OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, NEW DELHI AND 2 on 30 December 2022
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTWO PRESENT Between: The Cement Corporation Of lndia Packing Plant Union, rep.by its General Secretary, K.Devidas, S/o.laxman Rl/o.Adilabad. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA(Special Original Jurisdiction)FRIDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTWOPRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAOWRIT PETITION NO: 4039 OF 2004
Between:
The Cement Corporation Of lndia Packing Plant Union, rep.by its GeneralSecretary, K.Devidas, S/o.laxman Rl/o.Adilabad.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The Govt.of lndia, Ministry Of Labour, New Delhi House, New Delhi.2. The Cement Corporation of lndia Limited, rep.by its General, Manager, CCITownship, Adilabad-500003(A. P.)2. The Cement Corporation of lndia Limited, rep.by its General, Manager, CCITownship, Adilabad-500003(A. P.)
3. The Cement Corporation of lndia Limited, rep.by its, Contractor i.e.M/s.S&MConstructions, Nehru Chowk, Near Railway Station, Adilabad.Constructions, Nehru Chowk, Near Railway Station, Adilabad.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 o'( the Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature ofWrit of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in issuing theproceedings d1.5.2.2004 terminating the contract of the 3rd respondent withoutfollowing the provisions contemplated Under lndustrial Disputes Act is illegal,arbitrary and unjust and consequent set aside the proceedings dt.5.2.2004issued by the respondent.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2009(WPMP. NO: 26046 OF 2009)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the [petition, ]the High Court may be pleased todirect the respondents to pay the wages to the petitioner union members /workmen i.e. packing Plant Contract Labours as [per ]the [qage ]board awardagreement dated 26.04.2005 @ Rs. 4,4781- [per ]month, [pending ]disposal of writpetition No. 4039 of 2004
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. G. RAVI MOHANCounsel forthe Respondent No.1: SRl. GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, OEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
Counsel for the Respondents No.2&3: SRl. K. SRINIVASA MURTHY
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE I{ON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO
WRIT PETITTON No.4O39 of 2OO4
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief; " to issue an Order, direction or u.tit more particularlAone in the nature of Wit of Mandamus, declaing theaction of th.e respondent in issuing the proceedingsdated O5.02.2004 terminating the contract of the 3,arespondent withottt following the prouisionscontemplated Under Industial Disputes Acf is illegal,arbitrarg and unjust and consequent set aside theproceedings dated 05.02.2004 lssued b1; theRespondent. "
2. Sri G.Ravi Mol'ra-n, learned counsel for thepetitioner submits that the 2"d respondent filed counteraffidavit, wherein para 1O of the counter, the 2ndrespondent specificall_v a"dmitted that the respondentCorporation is ready to set l,le their dues as per the schemesanctioned bv the BIFR by paying the retrenchmentcompensation asi per the l)rovisions of I.D Act. He furthersubmitted that the respondent Corporation paid the similarretrenchment compensation to the similarly situatedpersons in W,P No.21740 of 2Ol2 and he requested thisCourt to direct the respondcnt Corporation to pay the \
To,
retrenchment compensation to the members of thepetitioner's Union as per their eligibility, as admitted by therespondent No.2 in the counter and grant liberty to thepetitioners to claim other benefits if any, before appropriateauthorities.
3. In view of the same, this Writ Petition isdisposed of directing the respondent Corporation to pay theretrenchment compensation to the members of thepetitioner's Union as per their eligibility within a period ofthree(03) months from the date of receipt of a copy ol thisOrder and also granting iiberty to the petitioner's Union toavail the other remedies available under the law.
4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Nocosts.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, ifany, shall stand closed- RAOSD/. N[. ]CHANDRA [SEKH]TRARASSISTAN//TRUE [COPY//]SECTIO[N ][OFFICER]
3ffi 33 3 351 &HAI""Sir0$'fff'SABLYVLo''"''o* [GENERAL]
33 I J t? t t*"iff ['3 ][A?,fi ][VRL^ ][M ][u ][Rr ][Hy, ][Ad vo ][cate to ][P ][u ][cl]4. Two CD [coPies]BM.GJPA_
I
CC
tHIGH COURTCOURTDATED:3011212022
-tHIGH COURTCOURTDATED:30112120221i'[r_ S ][fAIg..]c,)'-I.l31 [lN ][?sn]ORDER..'WP.No.4039 of 2004
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS
osQ'egi'r\A-\*