Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANAND SHARMA
Reliance Infrastructure Limited (Erstwhile Known as B.S.E.S) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging orders related to labour disputes. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments against prosecution sanction for non-compliance. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 3. limitations on court's jurisdiction in criminal writ petition. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. determining the legitimacy of the companies involved. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. assessment of the sustainability of cognizance. (Para 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 6. exercising inherent powers to prevent abuse of law. (Para 30) |
| 7. conclusion of the criminal writ petition. (Para 31) |
ORDER :
1. The petitioners have filed the criminal writ petition challenging the order dated 09.06.2017 issued by the Additional Labour Commissioner, to grant prosecution sanction against the petitioners for disobeying the orders of the Labour Court. Petitioners have also assailed the order dated 11.09.2017 passed by the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur Metropolitan, whereby on the basis of aforesaid sanction for prosecution, cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for committing offence under Section 29 read with Section 34 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act of 1947').
2. It is stated t
Recognition of the limited jurisdiction for prosecuting parties under the Industrial Disputes Act, emphasizing enforceability of Labor Court awards against identified entities only.
Misconduct can be established outside the workplace if it brings disrepute to the management, and the Labour Court's reduction of punishment was found to be perverse.
The importance of evidence presented before the Labour Court, the limited scope of judicial review, and the impact of delay and suppression of material facts on the petition.
The termination of an employee without due process is illegal, and the burden of proof lies with the employer to substantiate claims of non-employment.
The illegal refusal of employment by the management necessitated compensation for the workman, underscoring the employer's burden to prove any contrary claims.
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
