M.C.AGARWAL
PRAG VANASPATI PRODUCTS – Appellant
Versus
ASSTT. LABOUR COMMISSIONER, ALIGARH – Respondent
( 1 ) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, an employer, challenges an order dated 30. 12. 1994, copy of which is Annexure-7 to the writ petition, whereby the Asstt. Labour Commissioner, Aligarh, declined to register a settlement for industrial dispute in terms of Section 6b of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act. The petitioner also seeks a writ of mandamus directing the said respondent and the other respondents, who are workmen to register the alleged settlement.
( 2 ) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri DInesh Dwivedi and Sri K. P. Agarwal. Senior Advocate for the respondents and also the learned standing counsel.
( 3 ) THE petitioners Industry named prag Vanaspati Products was afflicted with labour problems and it ultimately declared a lock-out from 30. 11. 1991. The State Government by its order dated 16. 6. 1992 prohibited the lock-out in the Company for a period of 180 days. The petitioner challenged the said order by means of a Writ Petition No. 21615 of 1992 which was allowed by this Court by order dated 11. 11. 1992. The prohibition order was quashed. The workmen approached the Honble Supreme C
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.