9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 989X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bench, in L.P.A. No. 177 of 1999(R) dated August 9, 1999. The appellant is the employer and 28 of its workmen are represented by respondent No. 2. The parties are, hereafter, referred to as "the employer" and "the workmen" respectively. 3. The facts giving rise to this appeal lie in a short compass. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, referred the following question under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'I.D. Act') to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (No. 2) at Dhanbad (for short, 'the Tribunal') : "Whether the action of the management of Central Mine Planning and Design Institute Ltd., Ranchi in terminating the services of Shri Naresh Jha and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ismissed the LPA as not maintainable. 5. Mr. P.S. Mishra, the learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No. 2, has contended that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is interlocutory order and is not a judgment within the meaning of Clause 10 as explained by the dicta of this Court in Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kanja and another, 1981(4) SCC 8. 6. The short question that arises in this appeal is : whether LPA 177 of 1999(R), against the order of the learned Single Judge passed on an application under Section 17-B of the I.D. Act, under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of Patna, before the Division Bench of the High Court, is maintainable ? 7. We may mention here that Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of Calcutta, Bomba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said High Court where the Judge who passed the judgment declares that the case is a fit one for appeal; but that the right of appeal from other judgments of Judges of the said High Court or of such Division Court shall be to Us, Our heirs or successors in Our or Their Privy Council, as hereinafter provided." 8. A close reading of the provision, quoted above, shows that it has three limbs : the first limb specifies the type of judgments of one judge of the High Court which is appealable in that High Court and the categories of judgments/orders which are excluded from its ambit; the second limb provides that notwithstanding anything provided in the first limb, an appeal shall lie to that High Court from judgment of one judge of the Hig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the High Court from a judgment of one judge of the High Court passed in second appeal; (ii) an order made by one judge of the High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction; and (iii) a sentence or order passed or made in exercise of power under the provisions of Section 107 of Government of India Act, 1915 (now Article 227 of the Constitution of India) or in exercise of criminal jurisdiction. 10. From the above discussion, it is clear that from all judgments except those falling under the excluded categories, an appeal lies to the same High Court. 11. The next question which needs to be considered is, what does the expression 'judgment' mean ? That expression is not defined in Letters Patent. It is now well-settled tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f different High Courts, referred to above, observed as follows : The intention, therefore, of the givers of the Letters Patent was that the word 'judgment' should receive a much wider and more liberal interpretation than the word 'judgment' used in the Code of Civil Procedure. At the same time, it cannot be said that any order passed by a Trial Judge would amount to a judgment; otherwise there will be no end to the number of orders which would be appealable under the Letters Patent. It seems to us that the word 'judgment' has undoubtedly a concept of finality in a broader and not a narrower sense." It was pointed out that 'judgment' could be of three kinds : (1) A final judgment. - in this category ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses of Letters Patent the test is : whether the order is a final determination affecting vital and valuable rights and obligations of the parties concerned. This has to be ascertained on the facts of each case. 14. Adverting to the facts of this case, Section 17-B of the I.D. Act confers valuable rights on the workmen and correspondingly imposes an onerous obligation on the employer. The order in question passed by the learned Single Judge determines the entitlement of the workmen to receive benefits and imposes an obligation on the appellant to pay such benefits provided in the said section. That order cannot but be 'judgment' within the meaning of Clause 10 of Letters Patent, Patna. The High Court is obviously in error in holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
