Summary
A bank employee dismissed in 1996 won reinstatement from the CGIT by an award of 18 July 2007. The award was stayed at the bank's instance, and the High Court ultimately upheld the reinstatement while denying back wages for the earlier period. He was reinstated only on 23 September 2013. When the CGIT under Section 33-C(2) directed payment of wages for the period between the award and reinstatement, the Karnataka High Court set that order aside. It relied on Bombay Chemical Industries. The Supreme Court restored the CGIT's order. The claim was to implement an adjudicated award, not an unadjudicated claim. An interim stay obtained by the employer cannot deny wages once reinstatement becomes final. The reinstatement relates back to the award, and Section 17B payments are to be adjusted.
Issues
- Whether a workman whose reinstatement award was stayed at the employer's instance but later confirmed is entitled to full wages from the date of the award until actual reinstatement.
- Whether such a claim is maintainable under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Provisions considered
- Section 33-C(2), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947An application to implement an adjudicated award of reinstatement and compute wages due under it is maintainable; Bombay Chemical Industries bars only unadjudicated claims. (¶ 7.4)
- Section 17B, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947Last drawn wages paid while the award was under challenge are to be deducted from the wages due between the award and reinstatement, not treated as extinguishing the claim. (¶¶ 7.3, 8)
Held
- The reinstatement ordered on 18.07.2007 was confirmed up to this Court, and only back wages up to the award were modified; the bank having obtained the stay against reinstatement, the employee cannot be made to suffer once reinstatement attained finality. (¶ 7)
- Interim orders are always subject to the final decision, and on the principle of merger the confirmed reinstatement relates back to the original award; pendency of the challenge and a stay are no ground to deny wages for that period. (¶¶ 7.1, 7.2)
- The High Court misapplied Bombay Chemical Industries, since the claim had been adjudicated and the workman only sought implementation of the award; he is entitled to full wages and emoluments from 18.07.2007 to 23.09.2013, after deducting amounts paid under Section 17B. (¶¶ 7.3, 7.4, 8)
Result
Civil Appeal No. 9008 of 2022 allowed without costs; the Karnataka High Court judgment dated 30.06.2022 in Writ Petition No. 7176 of 2021 set aside and the appellant held entitled to full wages with all emoluments from 18.07.2007 to 23.09.2013, less amounts paid under Section 17B.