Case Note & Summary
The dispute before the Supreme Court of India arose from an appeal preferred by the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (H.P.S.E.B.) and others against Mohan Singh Verma and others. The appeal pertained to the fixation of daily wage rates for daily rated workers, with specific reference to the category of Junior Draftsmen. The case was decided by a bench comprising K. Ramaswamy and B.L. Hansaria, JJ., on 1 September 1995. The material facts, as discernible from the brief order, indicate that during the pendency of the appeal, the appellant-Board issued an Office Order dated 7 June 1995, bearing No.7/HPSEB(SECTT) IR-94. By this order, the Board decided to fix daily wage rates for different categories of daily rated workers with effect from 1 January 1994. The Junior Draftsmen were placed at serial number 114 in the list of categories, and their daily wage rate was fixed at Rs. 73.20 per day. The Supreme Court was informed of this development, and the Court observed that in view of this fixation, the controversy involved in the appeal no longer survived. The legal issue before the Court was essentially whether the appeal remained alive or had become infructuous due to the subsequent administrative action of the appellant-Board. The Court did not enter into any substantive adjudication on the merits of the wage dispute, as the Board's own order effectively resolved the subject matter of the appeal. No arguments or submissions by the parties are recorded in the judgment text. The Court, upon considering the Office Order, concluded that the dispute had been rendered academic. In its reasoning, the Supreme Court noted that the appellant-Board's proceedings dated 7.6.1995 had decided to fix daily wages rates of different categories of daily rated workers against each of them, with effect from January 1, 1994. The Court took specific note that Junior Draftsmen were listed at serial number 114 and that their daily rate wages were fixed at Rs. 73.20 per day. Since the relief or grievance concerning the wage rate stood addressed by the Board's own order, the Court held that there was no live controversy to adjudicate. Consequently, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal as infructuous and imposed no costs. The judgment is a short order rather than a detailed reasoned judgment; it records no ratio decidendi beyond the principle that when the subject matter of a pending appeal is resolved by an administrative order of the party, the appeal may be disposed of as no longer surviving. No statutes, sections, or precedents were cited in the order. The decision favored neither party exclusively, as the appeal was simply closed without any substantive relief being granted or denied.
Headnote
A) Labour Law - Daily Wages - Fixation of Daily Wage Rates - No specific Act cited - The Supreme Court disposed of an appeal as infructuous after noting that the appellant-Board had fixed daily wage rates for daily rated workers including Junior Draftsmen via Office Order dated 7.6.1995, effective January 1, 1994, with Junior Draftsmen's rate at Rs. 73.20 per day. Held that the controversy no longer survived and disposed of the appeal without costs (Para 1).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appeal had become infructuous in view of the appellant Board's Office Order fixing daily wage rates
Final Decision
The Supreme Court granted leave, noted that the appellant-Board in its proceedings dated 7.6.1995 made in Office Order No.7/HPSEB(SECTT) IR-94 had decided to fix daily wages rates of different categories of daily rated workers with effect from January 1, 1994. Junior Draftsmen were at serial number 114 and their daily rate wages were fixed at Rs. 73.20 per day. In view of that, the controversy no longer survived. The appeal was accordingly disposed of. No costs.
Law Points
- Daily wage fixation by employer's office order during pendency of appeal renders the appeal infructuous and it is to be disposed of without costs
