- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 19 June 2023
- Bench
- Suman Shyam
- Case no.
- WP(C) 3537/2023
Judgment
ORDER Date : 19/06/2023
Heard Mr. B. Dutta, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Deka, learned counsel for the writ petitioners. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3. The petitioners herein, are the partners of a firm which is the owner of a Tea Estate, commonly known as Amchong Tea Estate, situated at Digaru under Kamrup (M) district, Assam. Assailing the order dated 31/05/2021 (Annexure-13) passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner-cum-authority under the Payment of Wages Act, Guwahati, in connection with LPW Case No. 06/2020 as well as the subsequent proceeding initiated before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Kamrup(M), in the form of CR Case No. 2593/2021, for enforcing the said order, the instant writ petition has been filed. Mr. Dutta, learned senior counsel for the writ petitioner has argued that as per the provisions of a bilateral agreement signed on 25/01/2021, the Management of the Tea Estate, is regularly paying a sum of Rs. 7/- to the workers in lieu of ration. Moreover, after the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manganese Ore (India) Ltd. Vs. Chandilal Saha and others reported in
(1991) Supp(2) SCC 465, law is settled that the ration cannot be included as part of the wages. Page No.# 3/3 Notwithstanding the same, the learned Assistant Labour Commissioner has issued the direction for recovery of additional amount payable on account of ration from the Management by ignoring the terms and conditions of the bilateral agreement dated 25/01/2021. Mr. Dutta has further argued that since ration cannot be treated as part of wages, the learned Assistant Labour Commissioner did not have the jurisdiction to passed the impugned order dated 31/05/2021. Hence, this writ petition. Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, on the other hand, has argued that the Management of the Tea Estate had not cooperated in the proceeding prompting the learned Assistant Labour Commissioner to issue the impugned order. After hearing the submissions of both the parties and on going through the materials placed on record, I am of the view that since the issue raised by the petitioners pertains to the issue of jurisdiction of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, which if accepted, would go to the root of the matter, the learned Assistant Labour Commissioner ought to have considered the said aspect of the matter before issuing any directive. But the said exercise has not been done in this case. As such, this writ petition is being disposed of with a direction upon the respondent no. 2 to review the order dated 31/05/2021, if a proper application is filed by the petitioners with such a prayer, within four weeks from today, by annexing a certified copy of this order. If the review petition is preferred within the time frame as provided in this order, the same be considered in the light of the observations made herein above and a fresh order be passed therein. Until such time, the aforesaid exercise is completed, further proceeding in CR Case No. 2593/2021 shall remain suspended. With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE
sukhamay Comparing Assistant
Case details
Parties and counsel
PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010133662023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/3537/2023o AJJAYoKHEMKAoANDoANRo S/O-oSRIoSYAMLALoKHEMKA,oR/O-o101oPRIMEoAPARTMENT,oCHRISTIANo BASTI,oG.S.oROAD,oGUWAHATI-781005,oDIST.oKAMRUP(M),oASSAM 2:oANANYAoKHEMKA oS/O-oSHRIoAJJAYoKHEMKA oR/O-o101 oPRIMEoAPARTMENT oAMRAWATIoPATH oG.S.oROAD oCHRISTIANoBASTI oGUWAHATI-781005 oDIST.oKAMRUP(M) oASSAo VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo3oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVERNMENToOFoASSAM,o LABOURoANDoEMPLOYMENToDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-781006. 2:THEoASSISTANToLABOURoCOMMISSIONER oCUMoTHEoAUTHORITYoUNDERoTHEoPAYMENToOFoWAGESoACT o1936 oGUWAHATI oDIST.oKAMRUP(M) oASSAM oPIN-o781007. 3:THEoLABOURoINSPECTORoCUMoINSPECTORoUNDERoPLANTATIONo LABOURoACT o1951 oGUWAHATI oDIST.oKAMRUP(M) Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM PIN- 781007. 4:THE ASSAM CHAH MAZDOOR SANGHA KAMRUP BRANCH K.C. SEN ROAD PALTANBAZAR GUWAHATI-781008 DIST. KAMRUP(M) ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PRESIDENT Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. BHASKAR DUTTA, SENIOR ADVOCATE Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.