IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KHOT

th

ON THE 13 OF NOVEMBER, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 2130 of 2018 SURESH PRASAD CHAUDHARI Versus CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND EX OFFICIO DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Sanjay Kumar Verma - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Neeraj Tiwari - Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State.

ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner against the award dated 09.09.2015(Annexure-P/1) whereby, the Labour Court, Satna has rejected the claim of the petitioner/workman for reinstatement and backwages against the illegal retrenchment on the ground of delay.

2 . It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was retrenched from the respondent-Department in the year 2006. The appropriate government has referred the matter for adjudication of the dispute vide order dated 07.11.2014. It is further submitted that Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity, 'the Act') though provides for limitation to file an application but that is only in case if the Conciliation Officer/appropriate government has not referred the dispute within 45 days then such application can be filed by the workmen within three years from the date of discharge/retrenchment. It is further submitted that such amendment has been incorporated in the Act w.e.f. 15.09.2010 and the retrenchment of the petitioner is of the year 2006 therefore, no limitation is prescribed under the Act for the dispute to be referred to the Labour Court as in the present case, the dispute has been referred by the appropriate government vide order dated 07.11.2014.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

4. It is evident from the impugned award dated 09.09.2015 (Annexure-P/1) that the dispute has been referred by the competent government vide order dated 07.11.2014. It is also undisputed that the petitioner was retrenched in the year 2006. The Labour Court, vide impugned award, has dismissed the dispute on the ground of delay holding that the petitioner was retrenched in the year 2006 whereas the dispute has been raised in the year 2014, and the matter has been referred vide order dated 07.11.2014 i.e., after a delay of 08 years. The same is barred by Section 2-A of the Act. The relevant part of Section 2-A of the Act reads as under :-

"2A. Dismissal, etc., of an individual workman to be deemed to be an industrial dispute.-

(1) ... ... ...

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 10, any such workman as is specified in sub-section (1) may, make an application direct to the Labour Court or Tribunal for adjudication of the dispute referred to therein after the expiry of forty-five days from the date he has made the application to the Conciliation Officer of the appropriate Government for conciliation of the dispute, and in receipt of such application the Labour Court or Tribunal shall have powers and jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute, as if it were a dispute referred to it by the appropriate Government in accordance with the provisions of this Act and all the provisions of this Act shall apply in relation to such adjudication as they apply in relation to an industrial dispute referred to it by the appropriate Government.

(3) The application referred to in sub-section (2) shall be made to the Labour Court or Tribunal before the expiry of three years from the date of discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or otherwise termination of service as specified in sub-section (1)."

From bare perusal of the provision of Section 2-A of the Act, it is crystal clear that the outer limit to file an application before the Labour Court is three years in lack of reference by the Conciliation Officer of the appropriate Government.

5. In the present case in hand, the petitioner has raised the dispute for the first time in the year 2014. The petitioner was retrenched in the year 2006. Thus, it is clear that the petitioner has tried t