Back
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Through Its General Manager – Appellant
Versus
Hindustan Aeronautics Karmchari Sabha Throu Its G. S. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Subhash Vidyarthi, J.
1. Writ C No. 1000315 of 2012 has been filed by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “HAL”) seeking quashing of an award dated 09.08.2011 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal (II), U.P., Lucknow in Award Case No. 52 of 2023, which has been published on 20.10.2011. By means of amendment, the petitioner has challenged validity of the reference made by the State Government on 22.07.2003 under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Industrial Tribunal (II), Lucknow for adjudication of the following questions:-
(ii) Whether it would be proper and legal to treat the workmen as employees of HAL, Lucknow keeping in view their long continuous service? If yes, its effect.
2. WRIT - C No. - 1000491 of 2012 has been filed by Hindustan Aeronautics Karmchari Sabha (hereinafter referred to as “HAKS”) challenging the validity of the award dated 19.10.2011 passed by the Indu
The appropriate government for HAL is the Central Government, and the Industrial Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by declaring the contract with the canteen operator as sham.
The Industrial Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by declaring a contract as sham without a prohibition notification under Section 10 of the CLRA Act, which is necessary for such a determination.
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 Industrial Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain complaints of unfair labor practices unless an undisputed employer-employee relationship is established.
The court ruled that without establishing an employer-employee relationship, reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act is inappropriate; contracts are valid unless proven otherwise.
A judgment contrary to the evidence or without evidence is perverse. Concession of counsel on such facts and law does not bind the party.Master-servant relationship.
It is settled law that additional documents placed on record cannot be examined for first time by this Court while deciding veracity of preliminary order/award-rendered by Industrial Dispute Act.
The classification of an entity as an 'industry' is contingent on its commercial activities, impacting the jurisdiction of labor adjudication forums.
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
