B.S.CHAUHAN
STATE OF U. P. – Appellant
Versus
PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT II, MEERUT – Respondent
( 1 ) IN all these petitions common questions of facts and law are involved. The impugned award of the Labour Court dated 30/01/1992 has been challenged on various grounds by the State. C. M. W. P. No. 21684-87 of 1992 and W. P. No. 32500 of 1992 have been filed challenging the order of reinstatement, while c. M. W. P. No. 21688 of 1992 has been filed against the direction given by the same award for regularisation of the services of the workmen. C. M. W. P. No. 16710 of 1999 has been filed by the workmen for seeking direction to the District Collector, Meerut to make the recovery as per the Recovery Certificates issued by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, meerut on various dates in execution of the award dated 30/01/1992. The petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.
( 2 ) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to these petitions are tha,t the respondent workmen raised an industrial dispute and the appropriate Government vide order dated 17/08/1987 made a reference to the labour Court as to whether the termination of services of the said workmen w. e. f. 16/08/1986 and 5/01/1987 was in accordance with law and if not to what
Referred to : Jacob M. Puthupararmbil v. Kerala Water Authority
Ashwani Kumar v. State of Bihar
Vikramaditya Pandey v. Industrial Tribunal
Prabhu Dayal Jat v. Alwar Sahkari Bhumi Vikas Bank
Sharma and another v. State of Punjab
Ravinder Sharma v. State of Punjab
Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. v. N. V. Puranchandra Rao
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Shyama Pardhi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.