Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner, Jaihind Sahakari Pani Purvatha Mandali Ltd., a registered co-operative society supplying water to agriculturists, challenged a judgment and order of the Industrial Court at Kolhapur dated 30 April 2016. The Industrial Court had allowed a complaint filed by the Respondents (employees) under Item Nos. 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU & PULP Act). The Respondents alleged that they were employed by the Petitioner in permanent posts since 1977, and that on 30 May 1990, a settlement was reached under which the Petitioner agreed to pay various dues including annual increments from 1 April 1989. The Respondents claimed that dues were paid only until 31 March 1999, after which the Petitioner stopped paying, constituting a breach of the settlement. The complaint sought implementation of the settlement and payment of dues. The Petitioner raised preliminary objections including limitation and that the society was not an 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act. The Industrial Court rejected these objections and allowed the complaint. In the writ petition, the main issue was limitation. The Petitioner argued that the complaint was filed belatedly, as the breach occurred in 1999. The Respondents contended that the breach was continuing, and the complaint was filed within 90 days of the last refusal. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the Respondents had made repeated demands, and the last refusal was on 30 June 2009. The complaint was filed on 28 September 2009, within 90 days. The Court held that non-payment of salary each month gives a fresh cause of action, and the complaint was not barred by limitation. The Court also noted that the Petitioner's other grounds were not pressed. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Limitation - Continuing Breach - Item 9 and Item 10 of Schedule IV of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 - The complaint alleged non-implementation of a settlement regarding payment of dues and annual increments. The employer raised limitation as a preliminary issue. The Industrial Court held that the breach was continuing and limitation ran from the date of last refusal. The High Court upheld this view, noting that each month's non-payment gave a fresh cause of action, but the complaint was filed within 90 days of the last refusal. Held that the complaint was not barred by limitation (Paras 4-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the complaint of unfair labour practice for non-implementation of a settlement is barred by limitation when the breach is a continuing one, and whether the Industrial Court correctly computed limitation from the date of last refusal.
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed. The Industrial Court's order dated 30 April 2016 is upheld. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- continuing cause of action
- limitation for unfair labour practice
- breach of settlement
- MRTU & PULP Act
- Item 9 Schedule IV
- Item 10 Schedule IV
