'Lethargic Approach' By State In Paying Back Wages To Reinstated Employee Despite Finality Of Lis: Rajasthan HC Asks Chief Secretary To Appear
Rapping the state's 'lethargic and callous approach' in effectuating the compliance of an award passed by the labour court in 2020, Rajasthan High Court has ordered the Chief Secretary to mark his appearance before the court tomorrow.Though the 'lis' attained finality in 2022 by the dismissal of the special leave petition preferred by the respondent state, no concrete steps were taken to...
Rapping the state's 'lethargic and callous approach' in effectuating the compliance of an award passed by the labour court in 2020, Rajasthan High Court has ordered the Chief Secretary to mark his appearance before the court tomorrow.
Though the 'lis' attained finality in 2022 by the dismissal of the special leave petition preferred by the respondent state, no concrete steps were taken to comply with the labour court's award affirmed by the topmost court.
The single-judge bench of Justice Sameer Jain deemed the situation as one that warranted judicial intercession by asking the Secretary to appear either virtually or physically on the date of the next posting.
“…As a result, we direct the Chief Secretary for the State, to mark his appearance before the Court on 21.02.2024, either physically or virtually, as he deems fit. The said order is passed on account of the compelling reason of non-compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court and going against the spirit of Article 141 of the Constitution of India”, the bench sitting at Jaipur ordered while allowing a relaxation for appearance in case the state ensures full satisfaction of the award passed in favour of the employee before 21.02.2024.
The petitioner employee's grievance before the Labour Court was that he was unjustly terminated from his services on 07.05.2015. In 2020, the labour court directed the respondent state to reinstate the petitioner and offer payment of back wages to the tune of 50 per cent. The current petition was filed by the employee to effectuate the state's compliance and seek initiation of proceedings against erring officers under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act [Penalty for breach of settlement or Award].
In January 2024, the High Court had also directed the respondent state to comply with the award expeditiously, but to no avail. Before the High Court, it was argued by Advocate Tanmay Dhand that the petitioner had been forced to run from pillar to post to get the benefits of the award.
Inadvertent delay and hardships faced by the petitioner were listed as grounds for claiming cost from the state, after drawing the court's attention to the recent decision in State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Gopal Bijawat, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 125. In this order pronounced by a Division Bench of the apex court three days before, a cost of Rs 10 lakhs was imposed on the state for harassing a litigant for 22 years by withholding the benefits of an award passed by the Labour Court.
Additional Government Counsel Akshay Sharma represented the respondent state authorities.
Case Title: Ram Swaroop Sharma v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Case No: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5408/202