THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.19762 OF 2008 DATED 6TH OCTOBER, 2010 BETWEEN: Mallela Siva Brahmam … Petitioner A n d The Commissioner, Sattenapalli Municipality, Sattenapalli, Guntur District. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.19762 OF 2008 O R D E R The petitioner, a Public Health Worker in the service of the Sattenapalli Municipality, assails the order dated 14.03.2008 passed by the Labour Court, Guntur, in I.A.No.96 of 2008 in M.P.No.2 of 2004. The petitioner earlier filed I.D.No.167 of 1995 aggrieved by his removal from service. Award dated 20.04.2001 was passed in the said I.D. directing his reinstatement in service with 50% back wages along with regularization of his services on par with one K.Subba Rao, who was his junior. The petitioner thereupon filed a petition under Section 33- C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity, ‘the Act of 1947’) in M.P.No.2 of 2004 claiming arrears of salary on par with K.Subba Rao. He filed the subject I.A., being I.A.No.96 of 2008, in the said M.P. seeking a direction to the Commissioner, Sattenapalli Municipality, Guntur District, to produce the acquittance register showing payment of salaries to K.Subba Rao for the period 1996 to 2004. By order dated 14.03.2008 the Labour Court dismissed the said I.A. Perusal of the said order reflects that the Labour Court was of the opinion that till the petitioner’s services were regularized on par with K.Subba Rao he could not maintain the petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Act of 1947 for seeking regularization of his services. The Labour Court further observed that execution of the Award was different from determination of the amounts payable under a pre-existing right, which would arise only after the regularization of the petitioner’s services. Holding so, the Labour Court said that summoning the pay particulars of K.Subba Rao would not serve any purpose for determining the petitioner’s claim. The Labour Court further stated that only after his services were regularized and if he was not paid salary on par with K.Subba Rao, the petitioner would be entitled to maintain the application under Section 33-C(2) of the Act of 1947. The Labour Court appears to have overlooked proceedings of the Chairperson of Sattenapalli Municipality in Roc.No.1575/95-C1 dated 01.05.2006, whereby the petitioner’s services were regularized in the post of Public Health Worker. Therefore the ground cited by the Labour Court for dismissing the I.A. filed by the petitioner does not hold water. As the petitioner’s services already stood regularized, he was entitled to maintain the petition under Section 32-C(2) of the Act of 1947 seeking computation of the amounts payable to him under the Award dated 20.04.2001 in I.D.No.167 of 1995. In the process of such computation, the acquittance registers maintained by the Municipality with information of full salary payments made to K.Subba Rao are very much necessary and relevant. The writ petition is accordingly allowed setting aside the order dated 14.03.2008 passed by the Labour Court, Guntur, in I.A.No.96 of 2008 in M.P.No.2 of 2004 and directing the respondent Municipality to produce the acquittance registers as sought in the said I.A. before the Labour Court, Guntur, within six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Labour Court, Guntur, shall thereupon proceed to adjudicate and dispose of M.P.No.2 of 2004 on merits. There shall be no order as to costs. -------------------------- SANJAY KUMAR,J 6TH OCTOBER, 2010 Note: Issue C.C. in ten days. (B/O)PGS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.19762 OF 2008 6th OCTOBER, 2010