Second reference to Labour Court on the same cause of action where award is accepted is barred by principle of res judicata

The petitioner workman who was engaged through contractor was terminated from service. He challenged the termination before the Labour Court contending it to be illegal. However, the petitioner workman failed to establish that he was either appointed or terminated by the respondent. Apart from this, another dispute erupted between the respondent and the petitioner workmen with respect to minimum wages payable as per Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (“1948 Act”). The division bench directed respondent to make payment to those who had filed execution on furnishing necessary surety for restitution of amount or excess amount. Pursuant to the said order, respondent paid the petitioner workman in accordance with the 1948 Act. Due to the payment of differential wages, the petitioner workman made another reference, the Labour Court dismissed the claim on the ground that payment of differential wages under the 1948 Act does not make any workman a worker of principal employer and the reference is hit by res judicata. The petitioner claimed that res judicata was not applicable as fresh cause of action arose on account of payment of wages by the respondent, this payment of differential wages confirmed that workman was directly appointed by the management. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in this CWP-14449-2024 (O & M) held that the petitioner workman accepted that he was engaged through contractor, he accepted the award and did not challenge the same, subsequent payment of differential amount did not create a fresh cause of action or wipe out principle of res judicata. The said principle is universal, and is meant to end litigation.