Back
ARINDAM SINHA, S. K. MISHRA
Ananta Kumar Majhi – Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Arindam Sinha, J. - Mr. Palit, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioners. He submits, his clients are similarly situate, as those who raised industrial dispute and the appropriate government made reference dated 7th November, 2016. He submits, impugned is order dated 10th October, 2022, by which his clients' application for being added as parties in the reference, was rejected. He relies on judgment of the Supreme Court in Municipal Corpn. of Greater Mumbai v. K.V. Shramik Sangh, reported in (2002) 4 SCC 609, paragraph-29.
2. Mr. Babu, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State.
3. Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party nos.8 to 11. He submits, petitioners neither were nor are similarly situate with his clients. He draws attention to the schedule of reference. We reproduce it below.
'SCHEDULE
'Whether S/Sri Mukunda Chandra Mohanty, Golekh Chandra Jena, Amar Kumar Roul and Jagadish Mohapatra, contract labourers of the outgoing contractor M/s-Kirtiman Transport (a contractor establishment of M/s-OSWAL chemicals and fertilizers Ltd., Paradeep) are entitled for re-employment under the incoming new contractor
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the addition of parties to an industrial dispute reference should only be allowed if it is necessary to make the adjudication effective and en....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the addition of a party in an industrial dispute must be necessary for effective adjudication, as determined by the limited scope of adjudicat....
The Labour Court has the discretion to add necessary parties in adjudication under the Industrial Disputes Act for effective resolution of disputes.
A dispute between a principal employer and contractors' workers does not constitute a valid industrial dispute under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, due to the absence of an employ....
The court upheld the validity of a reference order made under the Industrial Disputes Act, emphasizing the administrative nature of such references and allowing the Tribunal to adjudicate claims from....
The court affirmed that references of industrial disputes by the government require a prima facie satisfaction that a dispute exists, and amendments to pleadings after trial commencement are restrict....
The court clarified that direct prior demands are not mandatory for initiating conciliation and that the contractor-worker relationship can be adjudicated in the context of unfair labor practices and....
Companies must be party to industrial dispute adjudications, not just individual directors.
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
