High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Avanesh Kumar v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 36540 of 1995  RD-AH 8851 (10 May 2007)
Hon'ble Tarun Agarwala, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Labour Commissioner in consigning the matter to the record room and refusing to refer the dispute for adjudication before the Labour Court under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act.
The facts, as culled out from the record of the writ petition is, that the petitioner was appointed as a peon in a leave vacancy which came to an end upon the person joining his duty. The appointment letter clearly indicates that the petitioner was appointed on a leave vacancy. The management before the Conciliation Officer had categorically stated that the petitioner was appointed on a leave vacancy and when the previous incumbent joined, the appointment of the petitioner automatically came to an end. This fact has not been denied by the petitioner. Consequently, in the opinion of the Court, the Deputy Labour Commissioner was justified in holding that no industrial dispute existed and consigned the matter to the record room
In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition fails and is dismissed.
AKJ (WP 36540/95)
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.