Regional Labour Commissioner Cannot Exercise Adjudicatory Powers In Proceedings Under Sec. 33(1) Of Industrial Disputes Act
Case: Garrison Engineer (Central), Delhi Cantt V. M.J. Prasad & Ors.
Coram: Justice Pratibha M Singh
Case No.: W.P.(C) 10809/2020
Court Observation: “The benefits of ACP/MACP in career progression, are usually granted to employees in order to avoid stagnation. Employees are permitted to take some exams/tests to avail of career progression and if they qualify for the same, MACP/ACP benefits are granted,”
“It also contemplates the setting up of a Screening Committee for the purpose of processing the cases for grant of benefits under the ACP scheme. The OM is quite detailed and clear and, therefore, it would not be apposite to argue or hold that grant of MACP/ACP benefits by the Management qua employees governed by this OM is automatic,”
“The RLC in this case, as the Recovery Officer, was only dealing with the implementation of the award as granted by the ld. Single Judge on 17th April, 2012, and was not adjudicating the question as to whether the Workman was entitled to MACP/ACP benefits,”
“The RLC could not have gone into such complex issues while passing the impugned orders under Section 33C(1) of the ID Act, as the jurisdiction of the RLC is limited to awarding ‘amounts due’. The ACP/MACP benefits would not constitute amounts due’ in the facts and circumstances of the present case, especially in view of the order of the ld. Single Judge dated 17th April, 2012,”
Previous Posts
Nothing On Record To Even Remotely Suggest That The Act Was Consensual: Supreme Court Upholds Rape Conviction Download Judgement
Keywords
Regional Labour Commissioner, Adjudicatory Powers, Industrial Disputes Act
