9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 984X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stoppel dealing with the conduct of a party. In the case on hand, the management of FCI filed a writ petition challenging the Award passed by the Tribunal but having secured conditional interim relief therein, the management chose to implement the impugned Award though it was under no compulsion to do so - the management of FCI, be it for whatever reason, chose to acquiesce with and accept the Award in its entirety, though it made such compliance subject to the result of the writ petition. Its somnolence, thereafter, in taking timely measures for expeditious disposal of the writ petition compounded the matter further, leading to the passing of 18 long years, which conclusively weighed with the learned Judge and, in our considered opinion, rightly so. A party to a proceeding cannot be permitted to challenge the same but thereafter abide by it out of its own free will; garner benefit from it; get the opposite party to effectively alter its position; and then press its challenge after the passage of a considerable length of time. Having allowed the workmen to put in regular service to its own benefit for over two decades, the management can no longer claim an indefeasible right ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orkers was upheld by the High Court, the Tribunal opined that these 21 workmen should also be regularized in service as vacancies in Class IV posts were available. However, taking note of the fact that the workmen had not rendered services for a long time, the Tribunal restricted their entitlement to back wages. In consequence, the Tribunal passed Award dated 18.03.1997, holding that the action of the management of FCI in retrenching the services of these workmen was not justified and directed the management to reinstate them and regularize their services in Class-IV posts with effect from 10.05.1990, i.e., the date of their retrenchment, and to pay them 75% of their back wages, within a time frame. 5. Aggrieved by the said Award, the management of FCI filed CWJC No. 953 of 1998 (R) before the Jharkhand High Court. Interim stay of the Award was granted in the writ petition on 05.08.1999, subject to the FCI continuing to pay the full wages last drawn by the workmen. Thereupon, the management started paying each of them 507 per month, claiming that they were ₹ entitled only to minimum wages. Disputing this, the workmen instituted contempt proceedings in MJC Case No. 371 of 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in LPA No. 80 of 2019. By judgment dated 17.12.2020, the Division Bench modified the order under appeal, by quashing the Award to the extent that it directed regularization of the services of the workmen. This modification was made on the ground that such relief could not be sustained when there was no term of regularization in the reference of the industrial dispute. The Division Bench disposed of the appeal by setting aside the order of the learned Judge declining to interfere with the Award in so far as it directed regularization of services, but left untouched the direction to pay 75% of the back wages. 8. Both sides are in appeal before this Court against the judgment of the Division Bench. The Executive Staff Union of FCI filed an appeal on behalf of the workmen concerned, aggrieved by the denial of regularization of their services, while the management of FCI is in appeal against the direction of reinstatement and payment of 75% of the back wages to the said workmen. While issuing notice on 08.03.2021 in SLP (C) 3656 of 2021 filed on behalf of the workmen, this Court directed that operation of the Division Bench judgment shall remain stayed. Contempt Petition (C) No. 366 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DISTRICT OFFICE: NORTH GANDHI MAIDAN (GAYA) Ref: No. Estt.10[C/L-Cum-Class-IV]/2000/1927 24/26.11.2000 OFFICE ORDER In pursuance of Award dated 18.03.1997 in I.D. Case No.128/96 by CGIT Dhanbad, interim Order dated 5.8.1999 passed in CWJC No.953/98[R] and subsequent order dated 12.05.2000 passed in MJC No. 371/2000 by the Hon ble the High Court, Patna, Ranchi and in compliance of Sr. Regional Manager, FCI, Patna Office Order No.Estt.30[88]/94-Vol.II dated 10.11.2000, the following Ex.Casual Workmen are hereby re-instated w.e.f., 10.05.90, in the Cat.IV [Watchman]. They are entitled to 75% of full back wages from 10.05.1990 to 18.03.1997 and thereafter full wages of Cat.IV. Further, the above order is subject to the out-come of the CWJC No.953/98 pending before the Hon ble High Court, Patna, Ranchi Bench. They are directed to report for duty within 10[Ten] days from the date of receipt of this order. Srl. No. Name 1. Sri Sashi Shankar. .. 21. Sri Ajoy Kumar. Sd/- District Manager[I/c] . 11. Thereafter the management of FCI issued a corrigendum on 27.11.2000, which is of great significance. The corrigendum reads thus: THE FOOD COR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is no evidence of the management at least seeking expeditious disposal of the writ petition after complying with the Award, making it subject to the result thereof. In fact, the management merrily allowed the situation to continue for 18 long years, till the dismissal of the writ petition in November, 2018. 14. Given this factual scenario, we are of the opinion that the learned Judge of the Jharkhand High Court was perfectly justified in dismissing the writ petition on the grounds that he did, thereby upholding the Award. In Union of India and others vs. N. Murugesan and others [(2022) 2 SCC 25] , this Court pointed out that the phrases approbate and reprobate mean that no party can be allowed to accept and reject the same thing, as the principle behind the doctrine of election is inbuilt in the concept of approbate and reprobate, that is, a person cannot be allowed to have the benefit of an instrument while questioning the same. It was noted that an element of fair play is inbuilt in this principle and it is a species of estoppel dealing with the conduct of a party. 15. In the case on hand, the management of FCI filed a writ petition challenging the Award pass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
