Writ petition filed by a canteen boy seeking regularization of service based on specific agreements. The court held that the petitioner, being a workman, must invoke the jurisdiction of the appropriate labour court for redressal. The petition is dismissed.
None; petition dismissed with direction to approach the appropriate labour court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 81
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1206 of 2020
Petitioner :- Shyam Pal Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sachin Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Satish Chaturvedi
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for parties.
The claim of the petitioner, who is working as a canteen boy, for regularization is addressed on the basis of an agreement dated 27 October 1988 and 09 January 1991. In view thereof, it is evident that the petitioner who is a workman can invoke the jurisdiction of the appropriate labour court for redressal of his grievances. While preserving that right of the petitioner, this petition shall stand dismissed .
Order Date :- 21.1.2020 Vivek Kr.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appropriate authority for regularization of a workman is the labour court or the High Court.
Shyam Pal Singh
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
