[Judgment of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.] Heard Mr.Anand Gopalan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant.
2.This Writ Appeal is directed against the interim order of the Writ Court in W.M.P.(MD)No.15552 of 2016 in W.P.(MD).No.9712 of 2015, dated 25.04.2017, wherein the Writ Court directed the employee to withdraw 25% of the amount, which is lying in deposit.
3.The said order is being put to challenge by the Management by contending that a writ petition was filed by the management in W.P.(MD) No.7843 of 2009, challenging the award in I.D.No.35 of 2002, on the file of the Labour Court, Tirunelveli, dated 20.12.2007, which was dismissed for default and an application for restoration is pending. In the mean while, the worker filed execution petition in C.P.No.28 of 2012 and in this an order was passed on 19.10.2012, which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.305 of 2013, in which the Court order notice returnable in three weeks and granted interim stay. In the mean time the said petition is pending and the interim order was not extended. In the mean while, the worker filed execution application before the Labour Court to execute the order passed in C.P.No.28 of 2012, in which an order was passed by the Labour Court on 16.04.2015, which was challenged by the Management in W.P.(MD) No.9712 of 2015, in which order of interim stay was granted subject to payment of 25% of the award by the Labour Court, Tirunelveli within a time frame. The said order has been complied with. On an application being filed by the workmen, the Court has permitted the workmen to withdraw 25% of the award amount, which has been deposited. The said order is challenged before this Court in this Writ Appeal on the ground that the petition to restore the Writ Petition, challenging the award passed by the Labour Court, is pending and therefore, the workmen should not be permitted to withdraw the permitted amount.
3.Firstly, we may note that in W.P.(MD).No.305 of 2013, the order of interim stay was limited only for a period of three weeks, subsequently, it was not extended. As on date, the Writ Petition filed by the Management challenging award of the Labour Court, Tirunelveli in I.D.No.35/2002 stands dismissed and yet to be restored. In such circumstances, to strike a balance between the Management and the Workman, the Writ Court exercised its discretion and permitted the petitioner to withdraw 25% of the award amount, which is in deposit.
4.We do not find any error in the discretion exercised by the Writ Court, which do not warrants interference by this Court.
5.For the above reasons, this Writ Appeal is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. No costs..