1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5573 OF 2008 M/s. Simplex Mills Co. Ltd. ...Petitioner. Vs. Shri Mukesh Dudha Viras & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr. K.S. Bapat with Mr.Avinash Fatangare for the Petitioner. Mr. Arun D. Nimbalkar for Respondent No.1. ..... CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. December 10, 2008. P.C. Rule, by consent of Counsel returnable forthwith. Counsel appearing on behalf of the First Respondent waives service. With the consent of the Learned Counsel and at their request taken up for hearing and final disposal. The Petitioner conducted a textile mill which was closed with effect from 25th April 2004. The First Respondent was a Badli workman who was engaged from 3rd February 1997. The workman worked until 8th May 1999 when his services came to be orally terminated. The contention of the workman was that he had made a 2 demand for permanency and had claimed wages of Rs.4,000/- per month which had been paid to the regularly employed workmen. As a result, he was alleged to have been terminated without the payment of retrenchment compensation under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court on a review of the evidence on record, accepted the contention of the First Respondent that he had worked continuously from 3rd February 1997 until 8th May 1999. Admittedly, no retrenchment compensation was paid. The case of the employer was that the workman had left on his own accord and joined service elsewhere. But the Labour Court noted that no evidence in that regard has been brought on record by the employer. The Labour Court granted back wages for the period from 8th May 1999 until 24th May 2004 when the establishment was closed together with terminal benefits. The employer carried the matter in revision. The Industrial Court while affirming the correctness of the findings of the Labour Court directed the employer, in addition, to pay interest at the rate of 6% from 24th May 2004 until payment. Both the Courts below have recorded a finding of fact in regard to the employment of the 3 workman, the rendering of continuous service and the dispensation of his services without compliance with the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. These findings, concurrent as they are, also do not suffer from perversity so as to warrant interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, there is merit in the submission which was urged on behalf of the workman that the Industrial Court had no justification, in a revision which was filed by the employer against the order of the Labour Court to issue, in addition, a direction that the amount which had been computed by the Labour Court should be paid with interest at the rate of 11% per annum. The order of the Labour Court was not challenged by the workman and in the revision which was preferred by the employer, the Industrial Court was clearly not within its jurisdiction in directing payment of interest. In the circumstances, the direction in regard to the payment of interest shall have to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. During the course of the hearing, Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent-workman has placed on the record the claim of the workman which is as follows: 4 1) Notice pay = 1300/- 1,300.00 2) Back wages = 60x1300 78,000.00 3) Gratuity = 8x750 6,000.00 4) Retrenchment compensation 6,000.00 5) Bonus (5 years) 6,500.00 6) V.R.S. 41x50x8 16,400.00 ------------------ 1,14,200.00 7) Interest 6% p.m. 31,405.00 8) Cost. 25,000.00 ------------------- 1,70,605.00 Of the aforesaid items, the workman would be entitled to pay in lieu of notice; back wages of sixty months; gratuity and retrenchment compensation as enumerated in Serial Nos.1 to 4 above. The payment of bonus and payment on account of VRS has not been granted in the order passed by the Industrial Court and therefore, cannot be allowed. The payment of interest has, for the reasons indicated above, been deleted from the directions issued by the Industrial Court. In the circumstances, in order to obviate any controversy in this regard, it would be appropriate to direct that the Petitioner shall in compliance with the directions of the Industrial Court (save and except in regard to the payment of interest which has 5 been set aside) pay to the Respondent an amount of Rs.91,300/- comprised of (i) Notice pay of Rs.1300/-; (ii) back wages for sixty months in the amount of Rs.78,000/-; (iii) Gratuity in the amount of Rs.6,000/- and (iv) Retrenchment compensation of Rs.6,000/-. The aforesaid computations, it is clarified, are made on the basis of the admitted last drawn salary of Rs.1300/- per month. The Petition shall accordingly stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. .......