9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the Roster off system for Grade II Supervisors and Markers/Sorters/Checkers should be discontinued. 2. Whether Grade II Supervisors and Markers/Sorters/Checkers should be given half day's additional wages and another day off for working on Sunday. 3. Whether the demand of these employees is justified. 4. Whether the dismissal of the special leave petition by the Supreme Court operated as res judicata in the writ petition. Summary: Issue 1: Discontinuation of Roster off System The Tribunal found that continuing the Roster off system only for Grade II Supervisors and Markers/Sorters/Checkers amounted to unfair discrimination, as other supervisory staff were not on such a system. The High Court, however, held that the management has the right to determine how work is carried out and holidays are fixed, and interference is permissible only if this power is exercised unreasonably or unfairly. Issue 2: Additional Wages and Day Off for Working on Sunday The Tribunal noted that while the roster staff gets one day off for working on Sunday, they do not receive half day's additional wages, unlike other supervisory staff. The High Court pointed out that the roster staff are paid one day's additional wages and a compensating holiday for working on their weekly holiday, and the Tribunal's award to pay additional wages for working on Sundays was beyond the scope of the reference. Issue 3: Justification of Employees' Demand The Tribunal concluded that the demand for discontinuing the Roster off system and providing additional half day's wages and another day off for working on Sundays was just and fair. The High Court disagreed, emphasizing that the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by granting relief not within the terms of the reference. Issue 4: Res Judicata The High Court ruled that the dismissal of the special leave petition by the Supreme Court did not operate as res judicata in the writ petition. The Supreme Court clarified that the doctrine of res judicata, although codified in section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is not exhaustive and does not apply to the dismissal of a special leave petition by a non-speaking order. The dismissal of a writ petition in limine by a non-speaking order does not bar the entertainment of another writ petition or other proceedings on the same cause of action. Conclusion: The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, dismissing the appeal and confirming that the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction. The Roster off system was necessary for the successful working of the Port, and the relief granted by the Tribunal was beyond the scope of the reference. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
|
