Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Municipal Council, Bhandara, challenged an order dated 5th July 2002 passed by the Labour Court, Bhandara, in IDA Case No. 38 of 1999. The Labour Court had allowed an application filed by the respondent, Smt. Vimal Kodape, widow of Sadaram Kodape, and her children, under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for computation and recovery of wages. The original workman, Sadaram Kodape, had been employed by the Municipal Council and had filed a claim for regularization of his services. During the pendency of that proceeding, Sadaram died. Subsequently, an award was passed in his favor, regularizing his services. Thereafter, his legal heirs filed the application under Section 33C(2) claiming wages from the date of his initial appointment until his death. The Municipal Council contended that the application was not maintainable because the workman had died before the award was passed, and therefore there was no pre-existing right that could be enforced by the legal heirs. The Labour Court rejected this contention and granted the application. The High Court, in the present writ petition, upheld the Labour Court's order. The court held that the right to claim wages is a pre-existing right that survives the death of the workman, and the legal representatives are entitled to enforce it under Section 33C(2). The court noted that the workman had a right to wages from the date of his initial appointment, which was crystallized by the award of regularization. Therefore, the legal heirs could claim those wages. The court dismissed the petition, affirming the Labour Court's order.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Computation of Wages - Section 33C(2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Survival of Right - The legal heirs of a deceased workman are entitled to maintain an application under Section 33C(2) for computation and recovery of wages, as the right to claim wages is a pre-existing right that survives the workman's death. The Labour Court has jurisdiction to compute such wages even if the workman died before the award of regularization was passed. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the legal heirs of a deceased workman can maintain an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for computation and recovery of wages, when the workman died before the award of regularization was passed.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Labour Court dated 5th July 2002 in IDA Case No. 38 of 1999.
Law Points
- Right to claim wages under Section 33C(2) of Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947 survives death of workman
- Legal representatives can enforce pre-existing right to wages
- Labour Court has jurisdiction to compute wages even after workman's death
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (01) 125
Writ Petition No. 2724 of 2002
Mr. A.Z. Jibhkate for petitioner, Mr. A.M. Quazi for respondent
Municipal Council, Bhandara, through its Chief Officer
Smt. Vimal widow of Sadaram Kodape
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging order of Labour Court allowing application under Section 33C(2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for computation and recovery of wages by legal heirs of deceased workman.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner (Municipal Council) sought quashing of Labour Court order dated 5th July 2002 in IDA Case No. 38 of 1999.
Filing Reason
Petitioner contended that the application under Section 33C(2) was not maintainable because the original workman had died before the award of regularization was passed, and therefore there was no pre-existing right.
Previous Decisions
Labour Court, Bhandara, allowed the application under Section 33C(2) filed by the legal heirs of the deceased workman.
Issues
Whether the legal heirs of a deceased workman can maintain an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for computation and recovery of wages when the workman died before the award of regularization was passed.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the very basis for claiming wages under Section 33C(2) was non-existent because the original workman had expired prior to the date of passing of the award in the matter of regularization of his services.
Respondent argued that the right to claim wages is a pre-existing right that survives the death of the workman, and the legal representatives are entitled to enforce it.
Ratio Decidendi
The right to claim wages under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is a pre-existing right that survives the death of the workman. Legal representatives are entitled to enforce such right by filing an application under Section 33C(2) even if the workman died before the award of regularization was passed.
Judgment Excerpts
Learned Adv. Mr. Jibhkate for the petitioner, assailing the impugned Order dated 5th July, 2002, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhandara, in IDA Case No. 38 of 1999, argued that the very basis for claiming the wages under Section 33C.(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was non-existent, inasmuch as the original workman, whose legal heirs – wife and children had filed IDA application under Section 33C.(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, had expired prior to the date of passing of the Award in the matter of regularization of his services.
Procedural History
The original workman, Sadaram Kodape, filed a claim for regularization of his services. During pendency, he died. An award was passed in his favor. Thereafter, his legal heirs filed IDA Case No. 38 of 1999 under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Labour Court, Bhandara. The Labour Court allowed the application on 5th July 2002. The Municipal Council challenged this order by filing Writ Petition No. 2724 of 2002 before the High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench. The High Court dismissed the petition on 8th January 2014.
Acts & Sections
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: 33C(2)
