THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO.203 OF 2004 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ appeal is directed against the Judgment rendered by the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition preferred by the appellant herein, challenging the validity of the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal in I.D.No.29 of 1992. 2. Singareni Collieries Company, a public sector undertaking is a mining company involved in extraction and sale of coal. It has a large work force. One Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao was appointed as an Electrician in the year 1981 by the appellant. He was involved in a road accident in November, 1988, which resulted in amputation of one of his legs. Consequently, he was declared medically unfit for discharging the duties of an Electrician and consequently his services were terminated with effect from 01.08.1989. His case was considered subsequently for alternative employment and he was appointed as a Fan Operator, a surface job with effect from 01.09.1990. The post of Electrician is in Category V while the post of Fan Operator is in Category III. Singareni Collieries have entered into a settlement with a recognized Trade Union in terms of Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act on 12.03.1990. In terms of Clause 17 of the said settlement, Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao sought for protection of wages by way of grant of equal number of increments, as he has earned in the category of Electrician. Since this dispute remained unresolved between the parties, the Government of India, the Ministry of Labour by its order dated 09.06.1992, referred the following dispute in accordance with Section 10(i)(a)(2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. “Whether the action of the Management of S.C.C. Ltd., in not granting increment to Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao, Surface Fan Operator, Cat.III, Godavarikhani No.10 Incline equivalent to the number of increments drawn by him as Electrician before having declared medically unfit for underground job, by violating term No.17 of the Memorandum of settlement dated 12.03.1990 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?” 3. Before the Industrial Tribunal Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao was examined as WW.1 and exhibited his documents as Exs.W.1 to W.6. On behalf of the management of the appellant, none was examined and no documents were marked. 4. It was not in dispute that the said Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao was working as an Electrician with Singareni Collieries Company with effect from 1981. It was also not in dispute that on 09.11.1988, he was involved in a road accident and subsequently, one of his legs was amputated rendering him, in the opinion of the medial board, unfit to work as an Electrician and consequently his services were as such terminated with effect from 01.08.1989. His request for alternative employment was considered and he was appointed as a Surface Fan Operator with effect from 01.09.1990, a post which was in Category III. It was also not in dispute that a settlement has been worked out by the Singareni Collieries Company with their recognized trade union on 12.03.1990 in accordance with Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Clause 17 thereof provided for certain benefits in the form of pay protection. After taking into account and consideration all the factors, the Industrial Tribunal declared the action of the management of the Singareni Collieries Company in not granting increments to Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao, Surface Fan Operator, Category III, Godavari Khani No.10 Incline equivalent to the number of increments drawn by him as Electrician before having declared medically unfit for underground job, is in violation of Clause 17 of the memorandum of settlement dated 12.03.1990 and hence, declared that the concerned workman is entitled for granting increments equivalent to the number of increments as Electrician before being declared medically unfit. Thus, the Industrial Tribunal rendered its award on 10.06.1994, which was challenged by instituting W.P.No.11053 of 1995. The learned single Judge by the Judgment rendered on 06.01.2003 affirmed the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal. 5. Ms. Uma, learned standing counsel for the Singareni Collieries Company has contended that the Industrial Tribunal, as well as the learned single Judge have erred in placing reliance upon the settlement dated 12.03.1990 inasmuch as the workman concerned has been terminated from the service of the Corporation, prior thereto, on 01.08.1989 as he was declared medically unfit to perform the duties of underground Electrician. It was further contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that, the workman concerned was declared medically unfit for the job of underground Electrician not due to any injury sustained by him in any mine accident but, all due to his involvement in a road accident. Finally, the learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the question of protecting the increments granted to the workman concerned in the category of an Electrician would not arise when he was offered alternative employment which was a post in the inferior status than that of an Electrician. 6. It is not in dispute that the Singareni Collieries Company has entered into a settlement on 12.03.1990. It was not in dispute that the workman concerned was offered alternative employment, thereafter, as Surface Fan Operator with effect from 01.09.1990. Therefore, the settlement will be attracted to the case of Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao. What is relevant for purpose of resolving the dispute relating to his pay fixation as a Surface Fan Operator is his date of appointment as such. In fact, the dispute does not concern his pay fixation as an Electrician. Therefore, the fact that his services have been terminated as an Electrician with effect from 01.08.1989, a date earlier to 12.03.1990 is of no avail to the appellant. The dispute centers around the pay fixation of Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao, is an alternative job offered to him as a Surface Fan Operator, i.e. on 01.09.1990 by which time the settlement became operative. 7. Before we proceed any further, it would be appropriate to notice Clause 17 of the settlement. “17. ALTERNATE EMPLOYMENT TO UNDERGROUND EMPLOYEES DECLARED MEDICALLY UNFIT: “For employees involved in mine accident and declared medically unfit for underground work but found suitable for surface jobs, all efforts will be made to offer a suitable alternative employment on surface with protection of wages. Employees medically unfit for underground due to reasons other than mine accidents will be considered for alternative jobs on surface. Employees found unfit for the original jobs underground will be offered other suitable underground jobs for which they are fit. The rehabilitated employees will be allowed increments in the lower category of jobs offered to them, equivalent to the number of increments drawn by them in their original categories. Continuity service will be given for purpose of terminal benefits. Cases where continuity of service was not given will be reviewed on their representation.” 8. It made it very clear that the employees who are found medically unfit for underground duties due to reasons other than mine accidents will be considered for alternative jobs on surface. It made it further clear that, such rehabilitated employees will be allowed increments in the lower Category of job offered to him equivalent to the number of increments drawn by him in the original category. Such employee will also be given the benefit of continuity of service for purpose of terminal benefits. Therefore, Clause 17 makes it very clear that the rehabilitated employee will be given equal number of increments as were earned by him in the original post held by him. It is not in dispute that, one annual grade increment would be released to every employee upon completion of 12 months of satisfactory service, unless the same is withheld as a measure of punishment. Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao, admittedly functioned as an underground Electrician between 1981 to 01.08.1989. During this length of employment, Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao could have earned not less than 7 increments, if not 8 increments, if he has rendered satisfactorily continuous service. Upon his rehabilitation as a Surface Fan Operator, Grade-III, he would be entitled to pay fixation not at the beginning of the scale of pay attached to the said post, but, at a stage which will be equivalent to that of 7 or 8, as the case may be, incremental stage in the said running time scale. Illustratively put, it might be quite possible that the rate of annual increment of an Electrician could be Rs.25/- whereas, the rate of annual increment for a Surface Fan Operator could be Rs.15/-. If an employee has earned 7 or 8 increments as an Electrician, his pay would have risen from its initial stage by approximately Rs.175/-(Rs.25x7) or Rs.200/- (Rs.25x8) as the case may be whereas, in the case of a Surface Fan Operator, the pay after earning 7 or 8 years annual grade increments would rise only by Rs.105/- (Rs.15x7) or Rs.120/- (Rs.15x8) as the case may be. As per Clause 17 of the settlement, as a Surface Fan Operator, Sri Ch. Raghurama Rao, illustratively would be entitled for a rise of Rs.105/- or Rs.120/- as the case may be and he cannot lay a claim for a hike of Rs.175/- or Rs.200/- as the case may be and therefore we clarify this aspect. Otherwise, the award of the Industrial Tribunal as confirmed by the learned single Judge is clearly sustainable. Hence, this writ appeal is allowed in part but, however, without costs. __________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ________________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J 01st December, 2011 Sp THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO.203 OF 2004 01st December, 2011 sp