IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 23598 of 2008(H) [CP.32/2007 of LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM] PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY LAW OFFICER SRI.RANJITH JOSEPH BY ADV. SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. SRI.N.GOPINATHAN,S/O. NARAYANAN JIJI BHAVAN, KIZHAKKEKKARA, NEAR WATER TANK, KOTTARAKARA. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ADV. SRI.N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ALONG WITH WPC NOS. 23715 & 23832 OF 2008 ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.23598, 23715 & 23832 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT All these writ petitions are filed by the Managing Director of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation {for short 'the Corporation'} challenging similar orders passed by the Labour Court. Suffice if the contentions in W.P.(C)No.23598/08 are referred to. W.P.(C)No.23598/08: 2. The first respondent was an employee of the Corporation and he retired from service on 31.03.2004. He filed a claim petition under Section 33(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Court claiming his dues under the General Provident Fund account, along with interest. Ext.P1 claim petition in this regard was opposed by the Corporation and Ext.P2 objections were filed. Essentially, the objection taken up was that the claim made by the claimant before the Labour Court is on the strength of the wage revision, as contemplated vide agreement dated 13.4.1999 and that the Corporation have approached the Government to W.P.(C).NO.23598/08 & Con. cases. :: 2 :: give financial aid. The Labour Court considered the objections and rightly noted that the Corporation has not disputed the correctness of the claim made by the claimant. But the only plea is that its financial position is precarious and it is not possible to undertake more liability and the Corporation cannot derogate from the right of the claimant, which he is otherwise entitled to, by way of pay revision arrears relatable to the period of 1997. Ext.P4 order passed by the Labour Court has been challenged by the petitioner. 3. I heard learned standing counsel for the Corporation and learned counsel for the first respondent. 4. There is no serious dispute regarding the entitlement of the claimant to receive the amount as prayed for in Ext.P1 application. It has to be noted that the claim relates to arrears of wages, which the employee was entitled to, on the strength of the pay revision agreement of year 1997. In such circumstances, there is no error whatsoever in the view taken by the Labour Court. I do not find any grounds W.P.(C).NO.23598/08 & Con. cases. :: 3 :: to interfere with the order passed by the Labour Court. 5. Learned counsel for the Corporation submits that the Corporation is facing considerable financial difficulties and it is this reason which has essentially prompted the Corporation to challenge the order of the Labour Court. Learned counsel prays for time to satisfy the order passed by the Labour Court and points out that steps are in contemplation to satisfy the claim. 6. In the facts and circumstances, while affirming the order passed by the Labour Court, it is made clear that the Corporation shall be permitted to pay the amount, as per the award of the Labour Court, within a period of four months from today. Writ petitions are disposed of, subject to the above directions. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge