IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15636 of 1999 Between: APSRTC rep., by its Depot Manager, Mehdipatnam Depot, Hyderabad, & another. … Petitioners AND Sri T.D.P. Kumar … Respondent Counsel for the petitioners : Sri V.S.K. Rama Rao Counsel for the respondent : Sri S.M. Subhan This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15636 of 1999 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Certiorari to quash order dated 31.08.1998 passed in MP.No.10 of 1997 by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Hyderabad, (for short, ‘the Labour Court’). By the said order, the application filed by the respondent under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ‘the Act’) has been allowed and the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.29,419=05 ps to the respondent towards his salary from 10.08.1992 to 21.06.1993. The respondent was removed from service following the departmental enquiry on 21.06.1993. In the said order, the disciplinary authority directed that the period of suspension from 10.08.1992 to 21.06.1993 shall be treated as “not on duty”. The appeal filed by the respondent was allowed by the appellate authority by order dated 30.10.1993. The appellate authority, while agreeing with the findings and legality of the order passed by the disciplinary authority, however, modified the punishment by reducing two incremental stages for a period of two years without the effect of postponing future increments. Accordingly, the respondent was reinstated. The respondent thereafter filed the application under Section 33-C(2) of the Act for payment of salary for the suspension period. The Labour Court allowed the said application on two grounds, namely; that the order of the disciplinary authority was invalid as in the show cause notice issued to the respondent, the disciplinary authority has not proposed such a punishment and that not treating the petitioner “as on duty” during the suspension period and withholding of two increments constitute double punishment, which is not permissible in law. In my considered view, the Labour Court committed a jurisdictional error in going behind the orders of the disciplinary and appellate authorities. Its jurisdiction under Section 33-C(2) is limited to the determination of question relating to the amount due or the amount at which the benefits receivable by the employee from the employer should be computed. In view of this limited power of the Labour Court, it cannot go into the legality or validity of the orders passed against the respondent in the disciplinary proceedings. A perusal of the order passed by the appellate authority shows that he has not interfered with the finding of the disciplinary authority, but had merely substituted the punishment by way of reduction of penalty. The appellate authority has not interfered with the order of the disciplinary authority directing to treat the period of suspension as “not on duty”. Therefore, it is not permissible for the Labour Court to find errors in the orders passed by the disciplinary authority. As no amount is payable towards salary during the suspension period, the Labour Court had no power to direct payment of any sum to the petitioner under Section 33-C(2) of the Act. For the abovementioned reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the order of the Labour Court is quashed. It is, however, stated at the hearing that in pursuance of the interim order, the respondent was permitted to withdraw 50% of the disputed amount. Considering the fact that the respondent is working only as a conductor, I find it appropriate and accordingly direct that the petitioner shall not recover the amount already withdrawn by the respondent. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition in the manner indicated above, WPMP.No.19295 of 1999 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 26.11.2008 ES