Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JAI NARAIN KAUSHIK AND ORS. versus SH.R.S.DUHAN, IAS, MANAGING DIRECTOR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Jai Narain Kaushik and Ors. v. Sh.R.S.Duhan, IAS, Managing Director - COCP-721-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 4165 (14 July 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.M.No.8397-C of 2006 in

C.O.C.P.No.721 of 2005

Date of Decision:-20.7.2005

Jai Narain Kaushik and ors. .....Petitioners vs.

Sh.R.S.Duhan, IAS, Managing Director .....Respondent ***

CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT
***

Present:- Mr.Sanjeev K.Tamak, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Dheeraj Chawla, Advocate for the respondent.

***

C.M.No.8397-C of 2006

Order Annexure A-1 is taken on record.

C.M. stands disposed of.

JUDGMENT

An industrial dispute raised by the Employees Union was decided by the Labour Court, Chandigarh vide its award dated 49.1992 (Annexure P-1)

The CONFED impugned the said award before this Court by way of C.W.P.No.536 of 1993, which was dismissed on May 30, 1996 except with the modification i.e. the revised pay-scales were directed to be granted with effect from December 1, 1989 instead of January 1, 1986. The CONFED thereafter filed LPA No.756 of 1996, which also met with the same fate and was dismissed by the Letters Patent Bench on November 22, 2004.

Alleging non-compliance of the aforementioned award of the C.O.C.P.No.721 of 2005

judgments, this contempt petition has been filed.

In response to the show cause notice, the respondents have come up with the plea that in the light of the award passed by the Labour Court, a self-speaking order dated 16.3.2006, which has already been taken on record as Mark-A, has been passed and all the monetary benefits arising out of the award have been released.

The aforementioned contention is, however, disputed by learned counsel for the petitioners and it is argued that some of the consequential monetary benefits have yet not been released.

Conscious of the jurisdiction of a Contempt Court and not to permit the same to be converted into that of an Executing Court, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to impugn that part of the order dated 16.3.2006 which according to them is not in consonance with the award passed by the Labour Court.

With the liberty aforementioned, this petition is disposed of.

Rule discharged.

July 20 , 2006 ( SURYA KANT )

poonam JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.