Court No.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 4551 OF 2001 (Old No. 18478 of 1990) Nagar Palika Haldwani through Executive Officer …………….. Petitioner Versus Regional Deputy Labour Commissioner, Kumaon Region, Haldwani, District- Nainital and others. …………… Respondents …………………. Sri Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri H.M.Raturi, learned Standing counsel, for the State /respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Sri Chetan Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5,7,8,9 and 10. Date: Aug. 06,2008. Hon’ble P.C.Verma,J. This writ petition has been filed seeking writ of certiorari to quash the recovery certificate for Rs. 20,947.90 issued by the Deputy Labour Commissioner including notice, contained in Annexure No. I & I-A to the writ petition, issued by the Tehsildar, Haldwani and further a writ of mandamus requiring the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 not to proceed with the recovery. 2. Recovery certificate for Rs. 20,947.90 was issued by Regional Deputy Labour Commissioner, Kumaon Region under Section 6 (H)(1) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act to respondent No.3/Collector, Nainital for realization of the amount as arrears of land revenue in pursuance of which Tehsildar, Haldwani had issued 2 recovery notice dated 03.07.1990 to the petitioner. A dispute was raised by Tehbazari Moharrirs of the petitioner/Nagar Palika, Haldwani, on which the Labour Court gave an award dated 30.05.1988 which was published on 27.7.1988. The dispute raised before the Labour Court was whether the action of the Nagar Palika in not giving weekly holidays and gazetted holidays to Tehbazari Moharrirs is illegal? If so, to what compensation are the concerned labourers entitled? The Labour Court recorded finding that the Tehbazari Moharrirs were being allowed weekly holidays since 16.10.1986 but were not being allowed to avail gazetted holidays which privilege was available to the other Nagar Palika employees. The Labour Court held this discrimination to be improper and decided that the Tehbazari Moharrirs are entitled to the weekly holidays already being allowed to them and should also be allowed the gazetted holidays on paid basis with effect from the date of enforcement of the award. The Executive Officer of Nagar Palika directed for immediate compliance of the Labour Court’s award. The Tehbazari Moharrirs made a claim before the Labour Court purporting to be under Section 6 (H)(1) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act and Rule 33 of U.P. Industrial Disputes Rules claiming Rs. 20,947.90 arrears as compensatory wages for weekly and gazetted holidays during the period of 1st September, 1988 to 28th February, 1989. The Nagar Palika filed objection before the Deputy Labour Commissioner, which was decided in favour of the employees/respondents and the Deputy Labour Commissioner proceeded to issue the recovery certificate. Aggrieved with this, the petitioner /Nagar Palika has filed the present petition. 3 3. I have perused the impugned award and I am not inclined to interfere with the same. A finding of fact has been recorded that the employees are being discriminated which is illegal and unjustified and rightly allowed the gazetted holidays on paid basis. The findings of the Labour Court are findings of fact which calls for no interference. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. The writ petition has no merit and is dismissed. No order as to costs. (P.C.Verma,J.) 06.08.2008 P.Singh