High Court · 2025

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ or any appropriate writ or writs or directions/s more particurarry in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the order dated 29-6- 2005 passed by the third respondent in I\4p No. 13t2OO3,as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutiona I in the interest of justice and pass such other order/s as the Honble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. I.A. NO:1OF 200s(w PMP. NO: 20388 0F 200sI Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the order dated 29-6-2005 passed by the third respondent in Mp No. fitz}Oz, Pending disposal of the Writ Petition; and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI VNEK JAIN Counsel for the Respondent No'1 : L PRABHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No'2 : E'URMILA Counsel for the Respondent No'3 : GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT. .IUSTICE P.SREE SUDI{A T PETITIoIY No. 16052 of oo2 5 oRD R:E This writ petitior 2g.o6.2oospassed as illegal. o, ,' 'espondent '" filed to declare the order dated No 3 in M P.No. 13 of 2oo2

2. When the mat counsel for petitioner this writ petition is 11.O9.2O1g passed ter is taken up for hearing, Iearned contended that the issue involved in squarely covered by the order dated by the W.P.Nos. |S4ZO, 7S4Zt,l5473, Contempor2ry IN Bench 474 and 15475 of 2005. 1S 3 Following the order dated I I .Og .2O 19 15471, t5473, 15424 and 15475 of 2OOS and for e, this Writ petition is disposecl of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, W.P.Nos. tS47O, reasons if anyj sha_ll stand closed I I //TRUE COPYII S S J+^"-'i At6,3."dF I I I I I I l I I I I I I l I i l l I' I I I i To, 1 2 3

5. o. 1 The Chief E Left Bank, Sltj [?T, fl 5nfo"i;lfl1,il co rpo ra tio n Officer, Lab . The presiding . one cc to sRr VrvEK rorour one cc to sRr L.pRABnrN' one cc to E.URMTLA, court-llr, Hyderabad. Advocate [oPUc] SECTTON OFFICER ited (GENCO), Srisaitam [op UC] ^.Jff":""";Advocate. Iyr"":""r:l:3iFoR LABouR, Hish court ror the state Two CD Cooies !{9lg r1i!['a copy of the Order, dated 11.0e.201e in w. 15-414 & 15475 oi 2oos to thia orJ;i F:tqY -. :, ,- :: of Telangana at P.No.15470, 15473, -.--*rr"**d I i o^ (. 1t21 SIP s? _t/.,+ ./ .-/ '.-:>-" HIGH COURT DATED:0210512025 a< -) ORDER WP.No.16052 of 2005 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS eI los HON'BLE SRI JUSIICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVITI WRIT P ETITI ON Nos. l5 470. 15471 1s 473. 154 74 ond 15475 ol 200s COM MoNO RDER: The issue roised in these writ petitions is one ond the some ond hence, they ore being disposed of by this common order. For the soke of convenience. the focts in W.p.No.I5420 of 2005 ore discussed hereunder :- W.P.No.l5410 of 2005 is filed seeking the following relief :_ "....... to issue a writ or any appropriate writ or writs or direction/s more particutarty in the nature of writ of mandamus dectaring the common order in M.p.No.2/2003 dated 29.6.2005 passed by the third respondent, as i[egat, arbitrary and unconstitutional in the interest of .yustice ana pass such other order/s as the Hon,ble Court may deem fit...... ". Heord Mr.Sotyo noroyono representing Mr.B.Vijoysen Reddy, leorned counsel for petitioners ond Mr.Rovi Mohon, Ieorned counsel for respondents-workmen. It hos been contended by the petitioners thot their compony is o registered Compony ond the respondent_ workmon wos employed with the petitioners, compony ond ofter leoving the pelitioner compony i.e., neorly ofter five yeors. the respondent-workmon filed M.p.No.2 of 2003 before the Lobour 2 Court under Section 33 (C) (2) of the lndustriol Disputes Act cloiming over time woges The Lobour Courl' ofter considering the entire cose, hod erroneously ollowed the cloim mode by the respondent-workmon ond ihe Lobour Court hod cotegoricolly gove o finding thot the workmon is not entitled for over time woges for weekly offs ond Notionol ond festivol holidoys ln spite of giving such o finding' the Lobour Court hod erroneously ollowed over time woges for entire 365 doys Chollenging the some, the present writ petition is filed' Leorned counsel oppeoring for the petitioners contended thot if Notionol holidoys, festivols ond weekly of fs ore deducted' the respondent-workmen ore not entitled for omounts os determined by the Lobour Court' Therefore' on omount of Rs.l 4,250.49 ps. hos to be deducted in respect of M'P No l of 2003,onomountotRs.5,574.77ps.inrespectofM.P.No.2of2003, on omount of Rs.l1,663'64 ps' in respeci of M P'No'3 of 2003' on omouni of Rs.2,218.14 ps' in respect of M'P No'9 ot 2002' on omount of Rs.12,785.20 ps' in respect of M'P'No l0 of 2002' on omount of Rs.,l4,438.9/ ps' in respect of M'PNo'l1 of 2002 ond on omount of Rs.l2,6/0.80 ps in respect of M'P'No 12 of 2002 ond the petitioners ore willing to comply with the order possed by lhe Lobour Court in the obove soid botch of coses' provided f he soid omounts, os stoted obove, ore deducied from the orders possed by the Lobour Courf. Leorned counsel for the petitioners submils thol during pendency of these wrii petifions. lhe pelitioners hove cleposiled lhe omount before lhe Lrrbour Court ond the petifioners hove no objeclion if lhe obove soid omounls ore deducted from lhe orders possed by ihe Lobour Court ond opproprioie orders be possed to thot effect Leorned counsel oppeoring for ihe responden is_workmen hos submitted thot he hos no objeclion for deducting ihe omounts os stoled by the petitioners, counsel ond oppropriote orders be possed in the wrii petitions directing lhe Lobour Court to disburse the omounts in fovour of the respondents_workmen, ofier deducling the omounts, os stoted by the petilioners, counsel This Courl, hoving considered the rivol submissions mode by the respective porties, is of the considered view thot ihese writ petitions con be disposed of directing the Lobour Court io disburse the omounls in fovour of the respondents_workmen, ofter deducting ihe omounts, os stoted supro by the petitioners, counsel. within o period of four weeks from the dote of receipt of o copy of this order. lt is needless to soy thot if the pelitioners 4 hove not deposited the omounts in comprionce of the order possed by the Lobour Court' then the petitioners should deposit the omount within the time stipuloted obove' The excess omount to which ihe respondents-workmen not enUtled lo in respect of Notionol holidoys' festivols ond weekly offs, is directed to be refunded to the petitioners' Wllh the obove observotions' the writ petitions ore disposed of No order os to costs Pending miscelloneous Petitions' if onY, sholl stond closed l 1 -09-201 9 Prv ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J