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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9782

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
GOPINATH P., J
P. SATHISH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
LABOUR COURT ERNAKULAM – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 4722 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.CHITTOOR RAJAMANNAR, SMT.K.GEETHA, SRI.DILEEP CHITTOOR
For the Respondents: SMT. C S SHEEJA (GP)

A petition under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot be maintained without prior adjudication or agreement.

Headnote:In this writ petition, the court relies on Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, stating that without prior adjudication or agreement, a petition under this section cannot be maintained. The Labour Court's decision is upheld, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition.

JUDGMENT The issue raised in this writ petition is covered against the petitioner by the judgment of this Court in D+H Solutions India Private Limited v. Jayakrishnan Ramachandran Nair [2026 KHC OnLine 85] , where this Court has taken the view that without there being a prior adjudication or an agreement of the nature referred to in Section 33C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947, a petition under (2) of the 1947 Act cannot be maintained.

In the light of the view taken by this Court in the judgment referred to above, I cannot find any fault with the view taken by the Labour Court in the impugned order. The writ petition fails and it is, accordingly, dismissed.

Sd/-

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 Back to top