✦ Gauhati High Court · 12 Apr 2023

KUNTI TELLY v. MANAGEMENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE

SUMAN SHYAM3 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

KUNTI TELLY W/O SRI SUREN MAHALI, R/O PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE, P.O. BISWANATH CHARIALI, DISTRICT BISWANATH, ASSAM VERSUS MANAGEMENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, BISWANATH CHARIALI, P.O. BISWANATH CHARIALI, DIST. BISWANATH, ASSAM, PIN-784176. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K M HALOI Advocate for the Respondent : MR S N SARMA SENIOR ADVOCATE Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/1829/2022 SABITRI KHAIRA WIFE OF SRI GAKUL KHAIRA RESIDENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE P.O. BISWANATH CHARIALI DISTRICT BISWANATH ASSAM. VERSUS Page No.# 2/4 MANAGEMENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER BISWANATH CHARIALI P.O. BISWANATH CHARIALI DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784176. ------------ Advocate for : MR. K M HALOI Advocate for : MR. K KALITA appearing for MANAGEMENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/1828/2022 RAJO KEOT WIFE OF LATE SUKEN KEOT PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE P.O. BISWANATH CHARIALI DISTRICT BISWANATH ASSAM. VERSUS MANAGEMENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER BISWANATH CHARIALI P.O. BISWANATH CHARIALI DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784176. ------------ Advocate for : MR. K M HALOI Advocate for : MR. K KALITA appearing for MANAGEMENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/1827/2022 KISHMOTY PORJA WIFE OF LATE BHIBISON GOALA Page No.# 3/4 RESIDENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE P.O. BISWANATH CHARIALI DISTRICT BISWANATH ASSAM. VERSUS MANAGEMENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER BISWANATH CHARIALI P.O. BISWANATH CHARIALI DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784176. ------------ Advocate for : MR. K M HALOI Advocate for : MR. K KALITA appearing for MANAGEMENT OF PERTABGHUR TEA ESTATE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM Date : 12-04-2023 ORDER Heard Mr.

K.M. Haloi, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Mr. K. Kalita, learned counsel for the opposite parties appearing in all these cases. By the award dated 17-08-2017 passed by the learned Labour Court, Assam at Guwahati in Reference Case No. 13/2003, the writ petitioners/ opposite parties being the Management of M/s Pertabghur Tea Estate in the district of Biswanath was directed to reinstate as many as 08 (eight) workmen including the 04 (four) applicants herein, in service with full back-wages by declaring the order of termination from service as unjustified. The Management of the Tea Estate, as writ petitioners, has assailed the award dated 17-08-2017 by filing W.P.(C) No. 6848/2017, which is pending disposal before this Page No.# 4/4 Court. During the pendency of the writ petition, the four applicants have approached this Court by filing their respective applications under Section 17(B) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 praying for a direction for payment of last drawn wages.

Mr. Kalita submits that insofar as the applicant in I.A.(C) No. 3186/2022, viz. Kunti Telly is concerned, his client would have no objection, if an order under Section 17(B) of the Act of 1947 is passed by this Court. However, since the other three applicants have crossed their age of superannuation, he would like to file objection in their I.A.s. Mr. Kalita, however, does not dispute the fact that there can be no ground to deny the last drawn wages to those applicants until the recorded date of their superannuation. If that be so, the issue raised by Mr. Kalita need not detain this Court. After hearing the submissions of learned counsel for both the sides, all these I.A.s are being disposed of by providing that the last drawn wages of all the four applicants shall be paid to them as per Section 17(B) of the Act of 1947. In case of those applicants who are found to have already attained the age of superannuation, their last drawn wages will be paid till the date of their superannuation. The four I.A.s stand disposed of accordingly. JUDGE GS Comparing Assistant

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — s. 17(B).

Which court decided this case, and when?

Gauhati High Court, on 12 Apr 2023. The bench was SUMAN SHYAM.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Gauhati High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments