Smt. Urmila Devi v. The Central Coal Fields Limited & Ors.

Smt. Sonarin …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7349 of 2017 Sukhi Ram Saw …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents -2- With Bir Banshi Singh & Ors. …. …. Petitioners W.P.(L) No.7427 of 2017 Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Anr. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7448 of 2017 Chetram Satnami & Ors. …. …. Petitioners Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Anr. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7463 of 2017 Bhakala Kewat …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7495 of 2017 Sanaw Ram & Ors. …. …. Petitioners Versus Central Coalfields Limited & Anr. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7497 of 2017 Dhani Ram Sahu & Ors. …. …. Petitioners Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Anr. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7509 of 2017 Mahendra Bhuinya …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7520 of 2017 Kaushal Prasad …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7522 of 2017 Smt. Bipat Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7547 of 2017 Hiralal Chouhan …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7548 of 2017 Smt. Reshamati -3- Versus …. …. Petitioner The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7550 of 2017 Smt. Daropadi Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7569 of 2017 Chanderdeo Chouhan …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7581 of 2017 Smt. Asha Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7584 of 2017 Sarju Nonia …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7598 of 2017 Smt. Mangri Mundain …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7723 of 2017 Bhoj Ram …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7741 of 2017 Puniram Yadav …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.7753 of 2017 Smt. Fuleshwari …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents -4- With Duryodhan Dhobi …. …. Petitioner W.P.(L) No.1159 of 2018 Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1162 of 2018 Fagu Ram Sidar …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1165 of 2018 Badaki Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1166 of 2018 Smt. Manmatiya Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1168 of 2018 Bhikhari Bhuinya …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1170 of 2018 Godo Ram …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1174 of 2018 Smt. Manwa Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1474 of 2018 Sudhir Tirkey …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.2399 of 2018 Smt. Nanki Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus -5- The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.2569 of 2018 Smt. Firtin Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.2575 of 2018 Smt. Pancham Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.2576 of 2018 Chhotan Manjhi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.2603 of 2018 Smt. Laxmi Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.2872 of 2018 Sanichar Munda …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.5752 of 2018 Smt. Ram Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.5774 of 2018 Rabindra Kumar …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.5777 of 2018 Bisheshwar Chouhan …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.5778 of 2018 Babu Ram …. …. Petitioner Versus -6- The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.5780 of 2018 Smt. Sabo Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1697 of 2019 Smt. Nanki Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1698 of 2019 Smt. Ram Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1704 of 2019 Smt. Bahatin Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1705 of 2019 Smt. Balwa Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1706 of 2019 Smt. Bhurie Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1707 of 2019 Chhatu Mali …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.1708 of 2019 Smt. Kaya Bai …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.3072 of 2019 -7- Pradeep Vishwakarma …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.3818 of 2019 Shivram Nishad …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents With W.P.(L) No.434 of 2020 Punam Devi …. …. Petitioner Versus The Central Coalfields Limited & Ors. …. …. Respondents ------ For the Petitioner(s) CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO ------- : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate : Mr. Aman Dayal, Advocate [In all cases except W.P.(L) Nos.7427/ 2017, 7448/2017, 7495/2017 & 7497/2017] : Mr. Prambir Singh Bajaj, Advocate [W.P.(L) Nos.7427/ 2017, 7448/2017, 7495/2017 & 7497/2017] : Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Manish Kumar, A.C to Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, Advocate For the Respondent(s) For the Petitioner(s) -------- th August, 2022 Order No.10 /Dated: 16 Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, assisted by learned counsel, Mr. Aman Dayal in all cases except [W.P.(L) Nos.7427/ 2017, 7448/2017, 7495/2017 & 7497/2017], which are argued by learned counsel for the petitioner(s), Mr. Prambir Singh Bajaj. All these matters are taken up together as all the writ petitions have been filed against award dated 21.04.2017 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad in Complaint No.6 of 2013 arising out Reference No.58 of 1992. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s), Mr. Saurabh Shekhar assisted by learned counsel, Mr. Aman Dayal and learned counsel, Mr. Prambir Singh Bajaj has assailed the impugned orders on the ground that after issuance of charge-sheet, the petitioners filed an application before the learned Presiding Officer, Central Government, Industrial Tribunal No.-1, Dhanbad when the -8- matter was pending pursuant to the direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India to identify the real workmen. Some of the workmen who has joined the service, found to be fictitious as they have impersonated with real persons and thus, such charge-sheet has been issued. All the workmen have filed Vakalatnama in one application, which was registered as Complaint Case No.06 of 2013 arising out Ref. Case No.58 of 1992 and has adopted the said submission. Accordingly, the order has been passed in the case of Binod Rajak and 58 others whereby the learned Tribunal has declined to interfere in the application filed by the workmen under Section 33 (A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on the ground that there is no change in service condition of the employees rather the tribunal has considered that the question of impersonation is prima facie seen and thus, the charge-sheet, which was issued by the management is in accordance with law and the Management has every right to raise this issue to examine these things with regard to impersonation. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s), Mr. Saurabh Shekhar assisted by learned counsel, Mr. Aman Dayal and learned counsel, Mr. Prambir Singh Bajaj have assailed the impugned order(s) on the ground, that learned Tribunal has come to the conclusion that there is no change in service condition of the employees and thereafter in very next paragraph learned Tribunal has went into the fact of the merit of the matter and has given a finding that all are to be removed from the services. Once there is a finding has been recorded by the learned Tribunal that there is a impersonation then issuance of charge-sheet become meaningless and dismissed the application filed under Section 33 (A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but holding it that such person should have been dismissed, is an unnecessary finding recorded by the learned Tribunal, which is beyond the jurisdiction of the I.D. Act, and as such, the impugned order may be set aside. Learned counsel Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha assisted by Mr. Manish Kumar on instruction of learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta has opposed the prayer and submitted that a charge-sheet was issued to the employees with regard to examination of their authenticity as there is allegation with regard to impersonation. The petitioners have invoked the Provision of Section 33(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which was itself not maintainable, as such, learned Tribunal has passed an order on application(s) filed by the petitioner(s), as such, this Court may not interfere with the same. -9- Be that as it may, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into facts and circumstances, since the learned Tribunal was in process of identifying the correct persons pursuant to the order passed by the Apex Court in Reference No.58 of 1992, 18 persons have been given employment in the process and subsequently the correct persons have approached the Management and Management after prima facie found that there is impersonation and a charge-sheet has been issued to examine the authenticity of the workmen. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the Management has rightly issued the charge-sheet. The Management has every right to examine the authenticity and impersonation of the persons, accordingly the charge-sheet remains intact and the management shall proceed in accordance with law. All the writ petitions are hereby dismissed. All pending I.As. stand closed. (Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) RS/-Rohit