IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2011 / 25TH JYAISHTA 1933 WA.No. 296 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.12237/2010 IN WPC.1539/2006 Dated 17/01/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- PAYYANNUR KHADI CENTRE REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, PAYYANNUR PO,KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. T.V.SREENIVASAN,S/O.GOVINDAN,KELOTH, NEAR KAPPAD ROAD, PAYYANNUR 670 307. 2. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ,KOZHIKODE 673 001. ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. CHELAMESWAR, C.J & ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 296 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar, CJ. Aggrieved by an order in I.A.No.12237 of 2010 in W.P(C). No.1539 of 2006 the first respondent therein, the employer of the first respondent herein, preferred the instant appeal. 2. The abovementioned Writ Petition was filed challenging an award of the Industrial Tribunal, Kozhikode in I.D.No.25 of 1999. The operative portion of the said award is as follows: “In the result, an award is passed holding that the transfer of Sri.Sreenivasan from helper in the staff category to helper in the worker category is illegal and directing the management to reinstate him in service as helper in the staff category with full back wages from 9.2.'98, continuity of service from 30.12.'97 onwards and other attendant benefit” 3. The prayer in I.A.No.12237 of 2010 seeking payment of wages reads as follows: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent/petitioner/employer to pay full wages to the WA.296/11 2 petitioner together with maintenance allowance from the date on which the petitioner is denied of employment. Otherwise, the petitioner will be put to great prejudice, irreparable legal injury and hardship.” 4. Though the prayer is little imprecise, by the order under appeal the learned Judge of this Court construed the application with an application falling within the purview of Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act. Admittedly, the first respondent- employee had already preferred an application under Section 33C of the Industrial Disputes Act for recovery of the backwages as directed in the award. By the order under challenge, the abovementioned I.A was allowed and hence this appeal. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, we are of the opinion that ends of justice would be met in the instance case if the appellant herein is directed to pay an amount of `1,00,000/- within a period of eight weeks from today. We also direct that the Writ Petition, which is pending for the last five years in this Court will be heard at an early date and disposed of. Therefore, the Registry is directed to list the abovementioned Writ Petition on 16th August, 2011, subject to the condition that the appellant files proof of the payment as directed in this judgment, WA.296/11 3 before the learned Judge. We also direct that the appellant will pay the wages due to the first respondent for each succeeding months commencing from June, 2011 till the conclusion of the litigation. The order under appeal is modified accordingly and the Writ Appeal is disposed of at the admission stage itself. J.CHELAMESWAR, CHIEF JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE vgs