Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MANAGER,M/S.SELECTION SYNTHETICS LTD. versus LABOUR COURT,BHILWARA & ANR.

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MANAGER,M/S.SELECTION SYNTHETICS LTD. v LABOUR COURT,BHILWARA & ANR. - CW Case No. 7103 of 2005 [2005] RD-RJ 1655 (15 December 2005)

SB Civil Writ Petition No.7103/2005

Manager, M/s Selection Synthetics Ltd. v.

Labour Court, Bhilwara & Ors. 15th December, 2005

Date of Order ::

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR

Mr. Ajay Vyas ]

Mr. Bheemkant Vyas] for the petitioner. ....

This writ petition is directed against the award dated 22.1.2005 passed by learned Labour Court,

Bhilwara in Industrial Disputes Case No.52/01.

The appropriate Government by its notification dated 27.12.2000 referred an industrial dispute to Labour Court, Bhilwara for its adjudication in following terms:-

(

" , ! , # ' ) ! , * ,- ' ! , 14.9.99 1, ' ' ? 2, ! ! 2 ' ?"

The Labour Court while answering the reference held that termination of workman Shri

Rameshwarlal amounts retrenchment as defined under

Section 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the same was effected without adhering the provisions of Section 25-F of the said Act, as such the same is void. The Labour Court declared the petitioner entitled for reinstatement in service with continuity in services.

Challenge is given to the award aforesaid on the count that the respondent workman by communication dated 14.9.1999 voluntarily tendered resignation from services and as such he was never terminated or retrenched from service. The aforesaid contention of the petitioner has been dealt with by the learned

Labour Court in para 10 of the award impugned. Learned

Labour Court after considering the entire evidence available on record gave a specific finding of fact that the workman never tendered resignation voluntarily by communication dated 14.9.1999. Such finding of fact does not require any interference by this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India. The order impugned does not suffer from any error apparent on face of record or from any material illegality warranting interference of this Court in its extra ordinary as well as in supervisory jurisdiction.

The writ petition, therefore, is dismissed.

( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.


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.