The Bombay High Court has upheld a Labour Court order directing the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (MSEDCL) to pay overtime wages to three retired employees, rejecting the company’s challenge that the workers had no pre-existing legal right to such claims under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The Court ruled that the employees who retired as Artisan-A staff were entitled to overtime wages for work done between March 2010 and their respective retirement dates, as the claims were backed by sanctioned overtime bills issued by the Executive Engineer, which were never rejected by the Superintending Engineer. The Court observed that this constituted sufficient proof of a pre-existing and computable right, making the claims maintainable under Section 33(C)(2).
MSEDCL had contended that the employees were not covered by the company’s overtime circular dated 26.06.2000 and that the matter required adjudication, not execution. The Court rejected this argument, citing the undisputed performance of overtime work, prior payments for similar work, and the statutory right to overtime under Section 59 of the Factories Act, 1948.
Referring Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd. v. Shivaji Tukaram Kumawat, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2553 and noting the Supreme Court’s dismissal of an SLP therein, the Court dismissed MSEDCL’s petition, affirming the Labour Court’s order for payment of â‚ą1.89 lakh, â‚ą2.6 lakh, and â‚ą1.63 lakh respectively to the three employees with 12% interest.
Advocate for the petitioners : Mr. U. S. Malte
Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. G. N. Kulkarni
Read Order
