IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2011 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 1788 of 2011(W) ---------------------------------------- ID.240/2006 of LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.V.LAWARANCE H.NO.21/65, CHANIYIL, PERUMPADPPU, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI 682 006. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) KENDRIYA SHRAM SADAN, OOLIMUGAL, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM 682 030. 2. THE BASE VICTUALLING OFFICER NAVAL BASE, KOCHI 682 004. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.1788/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE COMMON AWARD PASSED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT IN I.D.NOS.240/06 TO 253/06. P2 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27/11/2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15/6/2009IN W.A.NO.224/2008. P4 COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 26/6/09 IN C.P.NOS.6/2008 TO 17/2008 PASSED BY CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT. P5 COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 21/7/2010 IN C.P.NOS.3/2009 TO 16/2009, PASSED BY CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT. P6 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30/10/2010 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ........................................... W.P.(C).NO.1788 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 4th day of March, 2011. JUDGMENT Petitioner and 13 other similarly situated persons made applications to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court invoking its powers under Section 33 C(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act. These applications were numbered as CP.Nos. 6 to 17 of 2008 and CP.Nos.3 to 16 of 2009. 2. By Ext.P4 dated 26.6.2009, CP.Nos.6 to 17 of 2008 were allowed and the second respondent herein was directed to pay the petitioners therein Rs.27,733/= each within one month. As far as CP.Nos.3 to 16 of 2009 are concerned, Ext.P5 order dated 21.7.2010 shows that CP.Nos. 6 and 7 of 2009 were dismissed and remaining CPs were allowed, directing the second respondent to pay Rs.1,30,000/= each to the petitioners therein. 2. According to the petitioner, the amount due under Exts.P4 and P5 was not paid. It is also his case that as per the provisions contained in Section 33 C(4) of the Industrial : 2 : W.P.(C).NO.1788 OF 2011 Dispute Act, 1947, the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court forwarded the orders to the first respondent being the appropriate authority for effecting recovery of the amount due under Exts.P4 and P5. It is stated that, despite the above, the first respondent did not take any action for recovery of the amount and complaining of the above, he made Ext.P6 representation which also remains unattended by the first respondent. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed. 3. The second respondent has no case that Exts.P4 and P5 have not become final nor do they have a case that the amount due under these orders have been paid. If that be so, having regard to the fact that the period prescribed for payment of the amount having expired, necessary action for recovery of the amount has to be initiated in terms of the provisions contained in the Industrial Dispute Act. Since it is the specific case of the petitioner that he has already filed Ext.P6 before the first respondent complaining of inaction on his part in effecting recovery of the amount, I direct that the first respondent shall on production of a : 3 : W.P.(C).NO.1788 OF 2011 copy of this judgment take appropriate action for recovery of the amount due under Exts.P4 and P5 from the second respondent provided he has received copies of Exts.P4 and P5 from the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court in terms of the provisions contained in Section 33C(4) of the Act. Necessary action shall be taken as early as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. cl