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

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
Jailal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sunil Sharma and Amit Jain, Adv.
For the Respondent: Gaurav Goel, AAG, Haryana

JUDGMENT :

Rajiv Narain Raina, J.

The impugned order declining to refer the industrial dispute for determination by the labour court reads as follows :-

"On the above subject you are informed that the State Government does not find your case fit to be referred to the court for adjudication because from the enquiry it has revealed that your services were terminated as per the terms and conditions of your appointment letter. The management was still willing to take you back in service without back wages for the intervening period, but you are not willing to join."

2. The reference has been declined by breaching all canons of industrial law and judicial precedents on the point long established that the appropriate Government is merely a post office in referring industrial disputes to the area Labour Court for adjudication on merits. In this process, the appropriate Government cannot don the robes of the court and decline reference on the ground that the termination took place in terms of the appointment letter. The second reason to decline the reference is equally bad, that the management is still willing to take back the workman in service without back wages for the intervening period bu







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