Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Gulam Mohammad Gulam Abbas, was employed as a plant operator with the Nagpur Improvement Trust and retired on 31.05.1996. On 30.06.1997, he filed a ULP Complaint No. 827/1997 under Item No. 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971, seeking correct fixation of his salary as per the 4th Pay Commission recommendations effective from 01.01.1986. He contended that his pay was wrongly fixed in the scale of Rs. 260-10390-15420-EB-15495 instead of the appropriate scale of Rs. 335-680, and that the corresponding pay scale in the 4th Wage Revision was Rs. 1320-2040. The respondent opposed the claim. The Industrial Court dismissed the complaint, leading to the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner argued that the wrong fixation was a continuing cause of action and relied on the Full Bench judgment of this Court in M.S.R.T.C. Nagpur v. Premlal Khatri Gajbhiye (2003 (II) CLR 387). The respondent contended that the claim was barred by limitation. The High Court held that the cause of action for wrong fixation arose at the time of fixation in 1991, and the complaint filed in 1997 was beyond the limitation period. The court distinguished the Full Bench judgment, noting that the facts were different. The petition was dismissed, upholding the Industrial Court's order.
Headnote
A) Limitation - Unfair Labour Practice - Continuing Cause of Action - Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971, Schedule IV Item 9 - The claim for difference in salary based on wrong pay scale fixation is not a continuing cause of action; the cause of action arises at the time of fixation. The Industrial Court correctly dismissed the complaint as barred by limitation. (Paras 1-4)
B) Industrial Law - Pay Fixation - Limitation - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The employee's complaint filed after retirement challenging pay fixation done years earlier is barred by limitation. The Full Bench judgment in M.S.R.T.C. Nagpur v. Premlal Khatri Gajbhiye (2003) does not apply as the facts are distinguishable. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the claim for difference in salary on account of wrong fixation is barred by limitation and whether the wrong fixation constitutes a continuing cause of action.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Industrial Court's order dismissing the ULP complaint as barred by limitation.
Law Points
- Limitation
- Unfair Labour Practice
- Continuing Cause of Action
- Pay Fixation
- Industrial Disputes Act
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 361
Writ Petition No. 3123 of 2005
Shri A.R. Patil for Petitioner; Shri Anant Thakre holding for Shri N.W. Sambre for Respondent No.1; Shri V.A. Thakre, learned AGP for Respondent No.2
Gulam Mohammad Gulam Abbas
Nagpur Improvement Trust, Nagpur; Member, Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Nagpur Bench
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Industrial Court dismissing ULP complaint for declaration of unfair labour practice.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of Industrial Court order and direction to respondent to release difference in salary due to wrong fixation.
Filing Reason
Petitioner claimed his salary was wrongly fixed in a lower pay scale and sought correct fixation as per 4th Pay Commission recommendations.
Previous Decisions
Industrial Court dismissed ULP Complaint No. 827/1997 on 16.02.2005.
Issues
Whether the claim for difference in salary on account of wrong fixation is barred by limitation.
Whether the wrong fixation constitutes a continuing cause of action.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that wrong fixation was a continuing cause of action and relied on Full Bench judgment in M.S.R.T.C. Nagpur v. Premlal Khatri Gajbhiye.
Respondent contended that the claim was barred by limitation and the Industrial Court's order was justified.
Ratio Decidendi
The cause of action for wrong pay fixation arises at the time of fixation and is not a continuing cause of action. A complaint filed after retirement challenging fixation done years earlier is barred by limitation.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner / employee has questioned the order dated 16.02.2005 delivered by the Industrial Court, Nagpur in ULP Complaint No. 827/1997 dismissing his ULP Complaint for declaration of unfair labour practice under Item No.9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971 for releasing to him the difference on account of wrong fixation in salary.
He argues that said pay scale prescribed for that post at Sr.No.37 in the Schedule of pay scale applicable in Public Works Department is the only relevant scale of pay for petitioner.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed ULP Complaint No. 827/1997 on 30.06.1997 before the Industrial Court, Nagpur, which was dismissed on 16.02.2005. Petitioner then filed Writ Petition No. 3123 of 2005 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, which was dismissed on 19.01.2010.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971: Schedule IV, Item 9
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
