Back
RAJBIR SEHRAWAT
Benetton India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Labour Court – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajbir Sehrawat, J. (Oral) - This is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 09.09.2013 (Annexure P-l) passed by respondent No.l, whereby amendment in the demand notice has been illegally allowed.
2. The sole issue raised in the petition and as argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner-employer is that the respondent-workman had submitted a demand notice dated 09.12.2002, wherein, it was stated that the service of the respondent-workman was terminated, vide letter dated 21.11.2002. The petitioner-employer had filed reply to the demand notice in which it was specifically pleaded that the dismissal order was passed on 21.11.2002 and the same was also dispatched on 21.11.2002. However, due to clerical mistake, no date was mentioned on the head of the letter. Thereafter, the respondent-workman had filed claim statement before theLabour Court. In the said claim statement, the respondent-workman had stated the date of termination to be 13.11.2002. The petitioner-employer filed written statement to the claim statement as well. In the written statement, the petitioner-employer had again
In proceedings before the Labour Court, the concept of withdrawal of admission does not apply, and strict rules of pleadings under CPC are not applicable.
The court upheld the dismissal of an amendment application in industrial dispute proceedings, ruling that proposed changes were repetitive and did not introduce new claims, affirming the Labour Court....
The court established that amendments to pleadings in Labour Court proceedings should be allowed liberally to serve the interests of justice, even if procedural errors occur.
The finality of the Labour Court's findings and the limited scope of re-appreciating evidence in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that claims filed under Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, must be made within the statutory limitation period of three years from th....
The proposed amendment was necessary for determining the real controversy between the parties, and strict principles of interpretation cannot be applied in a jurisdiction exercise under the Industria....
The ad judicatory authorities under the Industrial Disputes Act are not bound by the technical rules of procedure as in civil actions.
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
