Cw/10798/2016 Of Income-Tax Conti. Employees Uni. And Anr v. Union Of India And Anr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FORRAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. .. D.B. CIVIL WRIT NO. 10798 / 2016. 1.Income-tax Contingent Employee’s Union, Income-tax Office, Jodhpur (Association of casual labours of Income-tax, Rajasthan Jodhpur).tax, Rajasthan Jodhpur). 2.Jagdish Solanki S/o Shri Lal Chand, aged about 40 years R/o Babu Laxman Singh Colony, outside Third Pole,Mahamandir, Jodhpur – 342 001, (A member of theIncome-tax Contingent Employee’s Union).Mahamandir, Jodhpur – 342 001, (A member of theIncome-tax Contingent Employee’s Union). ----Petitioners V E R S U S 1.Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance,Department of Revenue, Government of India, New Delhi – 110 001.Department of Revenue, Government of India, New Delhi – 110 001. 2.Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Paota, C-Road, Jodhpur – 342 010.Jodhpur – 342 010. ----Respondents __________________________________________________ For Petitioners :Mr. T.C. Gupta.For Respondents :Mr. Sunil Bhandari. __________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MAHESHWARI Judgment / Order Per Hon’ble Lodha, J. 06/12/2016 BY THE COURT: 1.This petition is directed against the order dated 12[th] May,2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, JodhpurBench, Jodhpur (“CAT”) whereby, the Original Applicationpreferred by the petitioner-Income-tax Continent Employees’Union seeking directions to the respondents to make paymentof bonus to the casual labourers from the year 2010-2011onwards along with interest @ 12% pa has been disposed ofwith the directions in the following terms:- “7. Accordingly, the OA is disposed of with adirection to the applicants to supply the names ofthe effected individuals to the respondentdepartment. The respondent departmentthereafter may settle the issue in terms of theorder dated 07.04.2016 passed in OA 365/2014.No order as to costs.”direction to the applicants to supply the names ofthe effected individuals to the respondentdepartment. The respondent departmentthereafter may settle the issue in terms of theorder dated 07.04.2016 passed in OA 365/2014.No order as to costs.” 2.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits thatthere was a specific prayer made on behalf of the petitionerbefore the CAT regarding the payment of interest on the arrearsof bonus, however, the submissions made in this regard havenot been dealt with by the CAT and a review applicationpreferred by the petitioner seeking review of the order dated12[th] May, 2016 also stands dismissed by the CAT vide orderdated 4[th] July, 2016. 3.Learned counsel submitted that the CAT has issueddirections to the petitioners to supply the names of the effectedindividuals to the respondent-Department and accordingly, the (3 of 4 ) respondent-Department has been directed to settle the issuewith regard to payment of bonus in terms of the order dated 7[th]April, 2016 passed in Original Application No. 365/2014whereas, while deciding the Original Application No. 365/2014,the Tribunal has not issued any directions regarding payment ofinterest and, therefore, the order passed by the CAT to thisextent is erroneous. 4.On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for therespondents submitted that on the same day, yet anotheroriginal application preferred by the petitioner Union regardingrevision of pay of members of the petitioner-Union andpayment of arrears along with interest were disposed of by theCAT and aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred D.B. CivilWrit Petition No. 10817/2016 before this Court which standsdismissed by the order dated 4[th] November, 2016, therefore, nointerference in the matter is called for by this Court in exerciseof its extra-ordinary jurisdiction. 4.On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for therespondents submitted that on the same day, yet anotheroriginal application preferred by the petitioner Union regardingrevision of pay of members of the petitioner-Union andpayment of arrears along with interest were disposed of by theCAT and aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred D.B. CivilWrit Petition No. 10817/2016 before this Court which standsdismissed by the order dated 4[th] November, 2016, therefore, nointerference in the matter is called for by this Court in exerciseof its extra-ordinary jurisdiction. 5.We have considered the rival submissions and perused thematerial available on record. 6.It is to be noticed that the petitioner-Union, while claimingthe payment of bonus to its members from the year 2011onwards, did not set out any details regarding claim of theindividual members and, therefore, the CAT has disposed of theoriginal application in the terms indicated above. Obviously, interms of the directions issued by the CAT, the individualmember of the petitioner Union has to submit his claim before the respondent-Department in its turn is required to decide thesame in view of the order dated 7[th] April, 2016 passed inOriginal Application No. 365/2014. 7.Since, the actual entitlement of the individual members ofthe petitioner's Union has not been determined by the CAT, it isalways open for the members of the petitioner's Union to raisethe claim regarding interest as well before the respondents. 8.No case for interference by this Court in exercise of itsextra-ordinary jurisdiction is made out. 9.The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as tocosts. (DEEPAK MAHESHWARI),J. (SANGEET LODHA),J.