Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MARKANDEY KATJU, T.S. THAKUR, JJ.
Dena Bank – Petitioner
Versus
D.V. Kundadia – Respondent
S.L.P. (C) No. 17543 of 2010
Decided On : 16-07-2010
Interim Order - Labour Court - Writ petition challenging interim order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal dismissed as no writ should be entertained against an interim order. Final award can be challenged if aggrieved.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an interim order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. The High Court upheld the order of the single Judge dismissing the writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no writ should be entertained against an interim order of the labour court or the industrial tribunal. It held that only when a final award is given, a party should be allowed to challenge it if aggrieved. As the order in question was only an interim order and did not decide the reference finally, the writ petition was rightly dismissed.
Issues: Challenge to interim order of the Tribunal
Ratio Decidendi: No writ should be entertained against an interim order of the labour court or the industrial tribunal. Final award can be challenged if aggrieved.
Final Decision: The Special Leave Petition was dismissed, with the option for the petitioner to challenge the interim order if the final award goes against them.
ORDER :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. This Special Leave Petition has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Bombay High Court dated 22.01.2010 by which the Division Bench has upheld the order of the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner herein challenging an interim order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Mumbai dated 28.05.1997.
3. It is well settled by this Court that no writ should be entertained against an interim order of the labour court or the industrial tribunal. It is only when a final award is given, then a party should be allowed to challenge it if he is aggrieved.
4. In the present case, the order of the Tribunal dated 28.05.1997 was only an interim order and it did not decide the reference finally. Therefore, the writ petition was rightly dismissed. Hence, we are not inclined to interfere in this matter.
5. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed accordingly. However, if the final award goes against the petitioner, it will be open to the petitioner, while challenging that final award, to also challenge the interim order of the Tribunal dated 28.05.1997, if otherwise permissible.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
