IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 17552 of 1999 Between: The Chief General Manager, The Singareni Colleries Company Limited, Manuguru, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman, Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad. 2 The Area Secretary, Singareni Coal Mines Karmika Sangh (BMS), Manuguru, Khammam District, A.P., .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order, direction or Writ, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari after calling for the records from the Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad, in I.D.NO.8/1994 and quash the Award of 30.4.1998 passed by it. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.K.SRINIVASA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : ORDER : This writ petition is filed by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, through its Chief General Manager, challenging the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad, dated 30th April 1998, in I.D.No.8 of 1994. 2. The 2nd respondent/Union i.e. Singareni Coal Mines Karmika Sangh has exposed the cause of four workmen for their placement in the category of E.P. Group-D Welder. When the said claim was rejected by the Company and conciliation efforts were also failed, the Government of India has referred the dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication. The dispute which is referred to the Tribunal, reads as follows : “Whether the action of the management of Singareni Collieries Company Limited in not placing S/Sri Ch.Niranjan Reddy, A.Venkateswarlu, S.Suresh and K.Anjaiah in category E.P. Welder group-D is justified, if not, to what relief the workman is entitled to”. 3. By the impugned award, the Tribunal has held that the action of the petitioner/Company in not placing the four workmen in dispute, in the category of E.P. Welder Group- D, is not justified. At the same time, the Tribunal has further ordered for payment of payscales to the said four workmen in the category of E.P. Welder Group-D, from 05.10.1993. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner/Company has received the notices from the Industrial Tribunal on 07.03.1994, by which date, the four workmen in question were already placed in Group D. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioners that the Tribunal has passed the award, going beyond the scope of the reference. 5. During the pendency of this writ petition, this Court granted interim orders on 05.07.2000, suspending the impugned award. Inspite of service of notice on the 2nd respondent/Union, there is no appearance on its behalf, to oppose this writ petition. 6. From a perusal of the reference of the dispute, it is clear that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction in awarding payscales to the petitioners in the category of E.P. Group-D Welder, from 05.10.1993. Whether the four workmen whose case was exposed by the 2nd respondent/Union were entitled to E.P.Welder Group-D scale from 05.10.1993, was not the subject matter of the reference referred by Government of India to the Tribunal. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal has directed for payment of payscales from 05.10.1993, by going beyond the reference made under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 7. On the above said short ground, the award of the Tribunal to the extent of granting E.P.Welder Group-D payscales from 05.10.1993 to four workmen, namely, Sri Ch.Niranjan Reddy, Sri A.Venkateswarlu, Sri S.Suresh and Sri K.Anjaiah, is set aside. It is made clear that in all other respects, the award is confirmed. 8. The writ petition is allowed in part to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 26th February 2009. ajr