P. SATHISH KUMAR vs LABOUR COURT ERNAKULAM - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9782

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

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

Important Points

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

Subject

Employment Law - Industrial Disputes

Act Referred

Industrial Disputes Act: S.33C

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.

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

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/-