Disposed

Uma Shankar Gaur v. the General Manager

Delhi HC11 Sept 2017LPA/512/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench held that in an equal pay claim against Super Bazar, the High Court should not exercise jurisdiction under Article 226. Instead, the dispute must be treated under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, allowing recourse to an industrial tribunal. The appellant was given liberty to refer the matter to the appropriate Government.

What did the court decide?

The appellant at liberty to raise the pay dispute before the appropriate Government within four weeks for referral to the Industrial Tribunal.

Uma Shankar Gaur Vs the General Manager — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~19

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- LPA 512/2016 & CM No.34023/2016

¶4

UMA SHANKAR GAUR ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Rekha Giri for Mr. R.K. Kapoor, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE GENERAL MANAGER ..... Respondent Through: None.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 11.09.2017

¶10

The appellant is aggrieved by the Single Judge’s rejection of the writ petition. The claim of the proceeding was to seek a direction to extend the equal pay for equal work principle and ensure parity of pay scale and revised pay scales to the petitioner. The claim was for the period from 1991 to 2011. The Single Judge declined to exercise discretion essentially on the premise that Super Bazar – the management was not the State. What appears to have weighed with the Single Judge is the circumstance initially that Super Bazar had been directed to be wound up. The appellant had approached the Supreme Court directly by filing a Special Leave Petition which was permitted to be withdrawn on 05.07.2016 with liberty to approach the Division Bench of this Court, which he did eventually.

¶11

Counsel endeavoured to urge that Super Bazar is a multi-state co-operative society – the shareholding of which is predominantly that of the Central Government and that as long as such shareholding is not divested, its responsibility as a State has to be discharged. Learned counsel also relied LPA No.512/2016 Page 1 of 2

¶12

upon some orders to say that the Supreme Court is seized of the question with respect to attempts at revival of the Super Bazar.

¶13

This Court is of the opinion that irrespective of the contention that Super Bazar is a State under Article 12 or whether a remedy under Article 226 is available, the appellant is entitled to the normal remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 i.e. to seek the reference before the concerned industrial tribunal. Learned counsel for the appellant was agreeable to this opinion of the Court.

¶14

In these circumstances, the appellant is at liberty to raise the dispute pertaining to the claim which is the subject matter of the writ petition i.e. the one relating to parity of pay on the principle of equal pay for equal work, before the appropriate Government (Central Government) within four weeks. The appropriate Government then shall issue suitable orders referring the dispute to the concerned Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) within ten weeks with notice to the appellant. The Tribunal shall decide the reference at its expedient convenience in accordance with law. All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved.

¶15

Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

¶16

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

¶17

SUNIL GAUR, J

¶18

SEPTEMBER 11, 2017 kks

¶19

LPA No.512/2016

¶20

Page 2 of 2

Uma Shankar Gaur v. the General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uma Shankar Gaur v. the General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Government of NCT of Delhi Thr Secretary Vs Kaptan Singh

Gurbachan Singh Bhatia Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Litmited Vs Vijaya Kuamr Anugandula

Laxmi Narain Vs Shahana Begum & Ors.

M/S Saurabh Metals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Tarouni Construction & Finance (P) Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.