Authority: Calcutta High Court (High Court at Calcutta)

Order Date: 18 August 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: petitioner Ranajit Kumar Khanra (former employee of Kanoria Jute and Industries Ltd) vs. State of West Bengal & respondent No.2 (Kanoria Jute and Industries Ltd).
  • Background: Khanra joined the mill in 1969 as a time‑keeper, was terminated on 25‑04‑1980. The 4th Industrial Tribunal (1995) held termination unjustified and ordered reinstatement with full back wages. No reinstatement occurred; Khanra later filed multiple computation cases under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act for back wages.
  • Impugned Order: The 2nd Labour Court, West Bengal (order dated 17‑02‑2026, Computation Case No. 18 of 2011) directed the employer to pay Rs 1,43,336 for the period Jan 2006‑Oct 2009 with interest at 10% per annum.
  • Petitioner’s Claim: Sought recomputation of wages up to his superannuation age (58 years, October 2009) including all revisions, arguing the court had used 2005 wage rates and omitted later enhancements.
  • Respondent’s Defence: Asserted the mill was closed from 21 Mar 2006 to 22 Aug 2011 due to severe labour unrest; therefore no wages were payable for 2006‑2009. Submitted closure notices and reopening letter as evidence.
  • Evidence Findings: The court noted Khanra could not produce any payslips, co‑worker statements, or salary records for 2006‑2009. The employer’s documents showing closure and reopening were marked as exhibits (B, D, E) and accepted.
  • Legal Findings: The court held:
  • The petitioner’s date of birth (24‑Oct‑1951) makes his superannuation October 2009; he cannot claim wages beyond that date.
  • No proof of salary, increments, house‑rent allowance, or bonus for 2006‑2009 was produced.
  • The mill’s closure from March 2006 to August 2011 was established, eliminating any liability for wages during that period.
  • The earlier computation cases filed before the 15‑year limitation were valid, but the claim for wages beyond superannuation lacked basis.

Final Outcome

  • The impugned award dated 17‑02‑2026 is set aside as not in accordance with law.
  • The petition (WPA 13223 2026) is dismissed.
  • No wages are payable to the petitioner for Jan 2006‑Oct 2009.
  • All interim orders are vacated.
  • Photocopy of the judgment to be provided to parties upon compliance of formalities.

Topics: Labor Law, Wage Computation