SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

KAILASH GAMBHIR
Shiv Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Hansita – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Piyush Sharma and Rakesh Kumar.
For the Respondent: Anupma Beniwal.

JUDGMENT :

Kailash Gambhir, J.

By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the impugned Award dated 8.5.2002 passed in ID No. 417/1993 whereby the reference was answered by the learned Labour Court against the petitioner.

2. Brief facts as set out by the petitioner relevant for deciding the present petition are that the petitioner was appointed by the respondent as a machine man w.e.f. 1.11.1976 with the last drawn wages of Rs. 3200 per month, but was not given legal facilities and on demanding the same, the management got annoyed and terminated his services w.e.f. 18.06.1992. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner sent a legal notice dated 21.7.1992 to the respondent to which he received no reply. Thereafter, he raised an industrial dispute bearing ID No. 417/1993 whereby vide order dated 8.5.2002 the petitioner workman was held not entitled to any relief. Thereafter, the petitioner workman filed an application u/s 11 of the I.D Act r/w Section 114 & Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC for review of the above said award whereby vide order dated 21.4.2004 the said application was held to be not maintainable. Hence, aggrieved by the award











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top