Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Vinita - Appellant
Versus
Sri Ashok Perumulla RLC Central - Respondent
W.P.(C) 8455 of 2022 and W.P.(C) 8468 of 2022
Decided On : 27-05-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenges to orders under article 226 (Para 1) |
| 2. lack of consideration for parties' arguments (Para 2) |
| 3. right to a hearing (Para 3) |
| 4. court sets aside orders for lack of due process (Para 4) |
| 5. expectations for timely resolution by the commissioner (Para 5 , 6) |
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--The present petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dated 2nd May, 2022 in W.P.(C) 8455/2022 and impugned order dated 28th April, 2022 in W.P.(C) 8468/2022 passed by respondent No.1/Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), New Delhi whereby relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Fabril Gasosa & Ors. Vs. Labour Commissioner & Ors., 1997(1) SCALE 544 has inter alia held that the subject matter of the instant claim does not fall under the provision of Section 33 C(1).
2. I have perused the impugned orders of both the cases. It seems that in both the cases, the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), New Delhi has passed as stereotype order without taking into account the facts and contentions of the parties.
3. Mr. Jawahar Raja, learned counsel for the petitioners states that he was not given an opportunity of being heard.
4. Thus, this Court, without going into the merits and the contentions of the parties, set aside order dated 2nd May, 2022 in W.P.(C) 8455/2022 and order dated 28th April, 2022 in W.P.(C) 8468/2022 with a direction to the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), New Delhi to afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and pass a reasoned order.
5. This Court expects that the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), New Delhi, shall decide the matters expeditiously preferably within 10 weeks.
6. With these observations, the present petitions along with pending applications stand disposed of.
The court emphasized the right to a fair hearing and the necessity for a reasoned order as fundamental principles of natural justice.
Writ petitions against interlocutory orders of the Labour Court are not maintainable.
Nomenclature of the petition or the nature of relief sought for is not the only determining factor, but the nature of power available to be invoked before the High Court is one such important guiding....
The Labour Court is limited to interpreting existing awards or settlements and cannot adjudicate disputes without prior recognition of claims, as per Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act.
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
