State Of Chhattisgarh vs Karishna Kumar Kashyap
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.5813 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.36862/2016]
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANR. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
KARISHNA KUMAR KASHYAP RESPONDENT(S)
WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.5815 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 36863/2016, CIVIL APPEAL NO.5816 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 36864/2016 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5818 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 36865/2016 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5825 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 36869/2016 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5827 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 346/2017 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5828 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 11431/2017 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5832 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 11433/2017 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5833 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 10912/2017 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5834 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No. 11430/2017 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5835 OF 2017 @ SLP(C) No.14281/2017 @ CC No(s). 7815/2017
KURIAN, J.
Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. The only issue in these cases is, whether the
learned Single Judge of the High Court was justified NARENDRA PRASAD the award passed by the Labour Court, between those
1 who had ten years of service and those with less than
ten years of service.
4. We are afraid, the approach made by the learned
Single Judge of the High Court is not sustainable
under law. The only relevant consideration is,
whether the workman had completed 240 days within a
period of one year continuous service. It was that
legal error that was corrected by the Division Bench
in the impugned judgment.
5. We are informed that all the respondents/workmen
have been working ever since the award was passed by
the Labour Court. That means all the respondents
have been working for quite some time now.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant
No.1/State has submitted that the State may not have
sufficient work for accommodating the respondents.
If that be so, it is for the appellant No.1/State to
take appropriate steps in accordance with the
procedure prescribed under the Industrial Disputes
Act, without prejudice to any other liberty available
to them to act in accordance with law.
7. We also find that a coordinate Bench of this
Court has already dealt with the similar issue
leading to order dated 03.01.2017 rendered in Civil
Appeal No.34 of 2017 declining to interfere with the
award passed by the Labour Court.
2
8. The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.
9. Pending applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of.
10. There shall be no orders as to costs.
.......................J. [KURIAN JOSEPH]
.......................J. [R. BANUMATHI] NEW DELHI;
MAY 01, 2017.
3 ITEM NO.50 & 51 COURT NO.7 SECTION XV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 36862/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27/11/2015 in WA No. 574/2015 passed by the High Court of Chhatisgarh at Bilaspur)
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANR. PETITIONER(S) VERSUS KARISHNA KUMAR KASHYAP RESPONDENT(S) (with office report)
WITH SLP(C) No. 36863/2016 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 36864/2016 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 36865/2016 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 36869/2016 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 346/2017 SLP(C) No. 11431/2017 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 11433/2017 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 10912/2017 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 11430/2017 (With Office Report) CC No(s). 7815/2017 (With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report)
Date : 01/05/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Apoorv Kurup,Adv.
Mr. V.C. Shukla,Adv.
Mr. Avanish Rathi,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. J.P. Mishra,Adv.
Mr. Shankar Divate,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed judgment.
(NARENDRA PRASAD) (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed “Non-Reportable” Judgment is placed on the file)
4