IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 792 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 15/02/2008 in WP NO : 18871 OF 2005 on the file of the High Court.) Between: M/s. Andhra Sugars Limited, Chemical & Fertilizers Division, Kovvur, W.G.District, rep. by its Joint Managing Director. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 Kavali Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Radhakrishna Rao, R/o. H.No.12-5-14, Rachurivari Street, Behind Broker Office, Kovvur, W.G.district. 2 The Labour Court, Guntur, Rep. by the Presiding Officer. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant:MR.P.DHARMESH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari ) Aggrieved by the order, dated 15.02.2008 made in WV MP No.2377 of 2006 in WP MP No. 24006 of 2005 in W.P. No. 18871 of 2005 by a learned Single Judge of this court vacating the interim order dated 31.8.2005, the writ petitioner filed this Writ Appeal. It is case of the appellant - writ petitioner that it used to entrust job works to the contractors, who in turn used to engage their contract labour for execution of the same. The first respondent herein was engaged by one such contractor Mr. Atchutramaiah, who was not awarded any contract work from March, 1994 and as such the first respondent was not doing any work for the contractor in the appellant company. The first respondent raised an industrial dispute in ID No. 268 of 1994 before the second respondent, which passed an award dated 8.4.2005 directing the appellant herein to reinstate him with back wages at the rate of Rs.18/- per day from 21.1.1994 till the date of order along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of order and in case the first respondent is not reinstated into service within one month from the date of notification of the award, the appellant was directed to pay minimum wages to the first respondent from the date of the order. Aggrieved thereby the appellant herein preferred the above writ petition. Along with the writ petition, the appellant also filed WPMP No. 24406 of 2005 seeking stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the award dated 8.4.2005 in the above I.D. No. 268 of 1994 passed by the second respondent herein and a learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 31.8.2005 has granted stay subject to the compliance of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Seeking to vacate the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge on 31.08.2005, the first respondent herein filed WV MP No. 2377 of 2006 and the learned Single Judge by the impugned order vacated the interim order dated 31.8.2005 observing that no payment of wages under Sec.17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act was ever made since the date of passing the order i.e. 31.8.2005 nor the workman was reinstated into service. Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Appeal is filed. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant contended inasmuch as the first respondent was gainfully employed during 1999-2000 to 2006-2007 working as LIC Agent, the appellant Management is justified in not paying him the wages under Sec. 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act. He further contended that the particulars called for by the appellant company from the Life Insurance Corporation, were not furnished. As can be seen from the record, the Life Insurance Corporation has submitted its report dated 21.9.2007 which shows the payment of commission to the first respondent – workman during the year 1999-2000 to 2006-2007. However, the learned counsel for the first respondent – workman submitted that the workman has fairly conceded that he is working as L.I.C. Agent to eke out his livelihood inasmuch as he was terminated from service of the appellant from March, 1994, but it does not mean that he is a regular employee of the Life Insurance Corporation of India and, therefore, it cannot be said that the first respondent is gainfully employed. As can be seen from the report dated 21.9.2007 submitted by the Life Insurance Corporation, for the years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, the first respondent was paid Rs.3,670/- and Rs.3,679/- respectively, while for the years 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 he was paid a sum of Rs.8,939/- and Rs.9,084/- respectively. During the years 2003-2004 to 2006-2007 he was paid a sum of Rs.12,789/-, Rs.16,113/-, Rs.11,960/- and Rs.31,085/- respectively. For this earning as commission, after the termination of the first respondent by the appellant, the appellant cannot defy the interim order for payment of Sec. 17-B wages. According to the appellant, the wages under Sec. 17-B in the light of the order passed by the second respondent, would be Rs.4320/- per annum from 2005 onwards and in all it would be Rs.17,280/- for four years. Under the above circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the order impugned in the Writ Appeal. Accordingly, we direct the appellant to pay an amount of Rs.17,280/- to the first respondent – workman within a period of two weeks from today, in compliance of Sec.17- B Wages and shall continue to pay Sec. 17-B wages to the workman, pending disposal of the writ petition. With the above direction, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari __________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar June 16, 2009 MAS