State of U.P. and Another Vs Labour Commissioner and 6 Others

Court No. - 41

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4085 of 2020

Petitioner :- State Of U.P. And Another Respondent :- Labour Commissioner And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shreeprakash Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.

¶5

There were six References concerning the six respondents in this writ petition. The References were made on 11.4.2002 by the State Government for the resolution of the disputes which had arisen between the petitioners and respondents. When the References were not being decided, the respondent-Ghanshyam Singh and two others had filed a writ petition being Writ-C No.31310 of 2018 in which on 17.9.2018 this Court while disposing of the petition directed the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P. Gorakhpur to decide the Adjudication Case Nos.307 of 2009, 308 of 2009 and 310 of 2009. However, when the order was produced before the Labour Court and when it was found that the Court was not available, the State of Uttar Pradesh by the order dated 29.7.2019 transferred the three References, which were the subject matter of Writ Petition No.31310 of 2018, along with the other connected references to district Varanasi. Against this order, the State of Uttar Pradesh has filed the instant writ petition.

¶6

It is the contention of learned Standing Counsel for that for the petitioners to go from Basti to Varanasi would be a difficult task and that their official work at Basti would suffer.

¶7

Learned counsel for the respondents-workmen, however, in reply submitted that when there was no Court at Gorakhpur and when the matter had now been transferred to Varanasi, the matter ought to be decided expeditiously at Varanasi itself and also pointed out from the order-sheet which he had produced before the Court that eversince 2011 when the References were

¶8

made the petitioners had incessantly got the hearing adjourned. He further submitted that apart from getting the matter adjourned, the petitioners had never made any endeavour to get the matter decided. Labour Laws in our country, learned counsel for the respondents submitted, are a result of various welfare legislations which have been enacted by the Parliament and the State Legislatures and they should not be, in any manner, misused by the employers.

¶9

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents and upon having gone through the order-sheet which the learned counsel for the respondents has produced, this Court is of the view that the matter was, for no reason at all, lingered since 2011 and the workmen were suffering. If the matter is now further transferred to any other district it shall entail wastage of energy and time for no reason whatsoever.

¶10

For the reasons aforementioned, no interference is warranted. However, it is directed that now when the matter has been transferred to Varanasi, the Labour Court would make an endeavour to decide the References, which have been transferred to it within a period of six months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.

¶11

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 18.2.2020 GS

¶13

(Siddhartha Varma, J.)

State of U.P. and Another v. Labour Commissioner and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of U.P. and Another v. Labour Commissioner and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rathi Steel and Power Ltd. Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Regional Manager U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and 2 Others Vs Raj Bahadur Pandey and Another

Cheema Papers Limited Village Surajpur Swar Rampur Vs Commissioner Trade Tax U.P.Lucknow

Jagat Pal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M/S Shubham Steel Center Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pramod Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others