http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  1585-1587 of 2008

PETITIONER: Workmen Employed Under IT Shramik Sena

RESPONDENT: M/s Raptakos Brett and Co. Ltd

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 25/02/2008

BENCH: TARUN CHATTERJEE & HARJIT SINGH BEDI

JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT

O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL NOS 1585-1587 OF 2008 [ Arising out of SLP [C] Nos.1072-1074 of 2008 ]

1.      Leave granted. 2.      These appeals are directed against an interim order passed by  a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in  Letters Patent Appeal No.177 of 2007 with Civil Application  No.303 of 2007 in Civil Application Nos.1916 and 1554 of 2007 in  Writ Petition No.3079 of 2006.  By the impugned order, the  Division Bench of the High Court had modified an interim order  passed by a learned single Judge, which was as follows: - "[i]    As the Company has decided to reinstate the workmen  instead of paying dues u/s 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act,  the workmen shall be paid wages at par with unskilled  permanent workmen or the statutory minimum wages  whichever is higher, from the date of this order. [ii]    If no work is provided to the workmen by the employer,  they shall be paid wages @ Rs.2,500/- per month. [iii]   These wages shall be paid by the employer and  accepted by the workmen without prejudice to their rights and  contentions in the petition. [iv]    The arrears payable to the workmen on account of non- payment of wages @ Rs.2500/- per month, when work was  not provided to them, after the order of this Court dated  29.8.2006, shall be paid within a period of four weeks from  today."

3.      This interim order of the learned single Judge was taken in  appeal by the Management before the High Court of Judicature at  Bombay. The Division Bench disposed of that appeal by keeping the  interim direction Nos. 2 to 4 intact but so far as the interim direction  No. 1 was concerned, it was moulded as follows: -

"As the Company has decided to reinstate the workmen  instead of paying dues u/s 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act,  the workmen shall be paid last drawn wages or the statutory  minimum wages whichever is higher, from the date of this  order."

As noted herein earlier, these special leave petitions have been filed  against the aforesaid modified interim order of the High Court of  Judicature at Bombay. 4.      We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties  and examined the two interim orders passed by the learned single  judge and the Division Bench. Mr. R.F. Nariman, the learned senior

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

counsel appearing for the respondent submitted on instruction that  the management had never agreed to reinstate the workmen and  therefore, the question of calling the workmen to work in the  company during the pendency of the writ petition shall not arise at  all. The learned senior counsel for the appellant, however, submitted  that since the management is not willing to reinstate the workmen,  they should be paid in compliance with the interim direction No.4  made by the learned single judge, which has been affirmed by the  Division Bench of the High Court, that is to say, when no work was  provided to the workmen, the workmen shall be paid wages @ Rs.  2500/- per month till the disposal of the writ petition. Such being the  stand taken by the parties before us, we dispose of these appeals  with the following directions: - i)      The management shall not call the workmen/appellant  for work in the company and therefore, the  workmen/appellant shall have no obligation to join the  company for work but, during the pendency of the writ  petition, the management shall go on paying wages @ Rs.  2500/- per month.  ii)     The High Court is requested to dispose of the pending  writ petition at an early date preferably within 4 months from  the date of supply of a copy of this order.  5.      These appeals are thus disposed of with no order as to costs.