Allowed

Ernakulam District Industrial Estate Mazdoor Sangh v. the Union of India

Kerala HC9 Dec 2020WP(C)/22226/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, via a writ petition, directed the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner to conclude conciliation proceedings regarding an industrial dispute within two months after being provided with an opportunity to hear the petitioner and other concerned parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to conclude the Ext.P1 application raising industrial dispute by hearing all concerned within two months from the receipt of the judgment copy.

Ernakulam District Industrial Estate Mazdoor… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.22226 OF 2020(C)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MAZDOOR SANGH REGD. NO 412/82,. BMS OFFICE, I.S PRESS ROAD, KOCHI 682 018

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND SRI.ASHWIN SETHUMADHAVAN SHRI.AYESHA MARIA JOHN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT , GOVT OF INDIA, SHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN, RAFI MARG, NEW DELHI 110 001, INDIA.

¶11

2 THE DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KENDRIYA SHRAM SADAN, OOLIMUGHAL, KAKANAD, COCHIN 682 030

¶12

3 THE HLL LIFE CARE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAHILAMANDIRAM ROAD, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 012

¶13

4 THE HLL LIFE CARE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY THE UNIT CHIEF, OF IRAPURAM FACTORY, PLOT NO. 1 AND 2, RUBBER PARK, IRAPURAM, VALAYANCHIRANGARA P.O, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM, KERALA 683556

¶14

R1 BY SRI.M.N.MANMADAN, CGC

¶15

SRI RON BASTIN GP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.22226 OF 2020 2

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 9th day of December 2020

¶20

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner at sufficient length of time.

¶21

Petitioner trade union averred that it has moved Ext.P2 application before the 2^nd respondent for initiating conciliation proceedings in connection with an industrial dispute and despite such Ext.P1 demand notice being made as early as in September 2019, it has not arrived at a logical conclusion. The petitioner therefore submits that the 2^nd respondent be directed to take decision on Ext.P1 application.

¶22

I have also heard the learned the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent.

¶23

It is seen that petitioner trade union has raised an industrial dispute and issued a demand notice on 18.09.2019. It is pleaded in the petition that some conciliation proceedings took place and last such discussion took pace on 02.03.2020. However, no decision is taken as yet in the said matter. It is trite that industrial disputes, if raised, needs to be settled as expeditiously as

¶24

it can be. In the case in hand, the dispute is still at the level of

¶25

WP(C).No.22226 OF 2020 3

¶26

conciliation and it is averred that the 2^nd respondent is sitting tight over the said dispute.

¶27

In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of, with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to bring to a logical conclusion on

¶28

Ext.P1 application raising industrial dispute, by affording opportunity to all concerned for being heard, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR

JUDGE

ajt

WP(C).No.22226 OF 2020 4

¶34

APPENDIX

¶35

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶36

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 18-09-2019, SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING ENDORSEMENT AS TO RECEIPT ON THE SAME DAY.

¶37

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 07-10-2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶38

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF REGISTERED POST ISSUED BY THE INDIA POST

Ernakulam District Industrial Estate Mazdoor Sangh v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ernakulam District Industrial Estate Mazdoor Sangh v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Venugopal P. R. Vs Manager/Authorised Officer

Dr. Abdul Rasheed @ a.R.Babu Vs Ifci Limited

Baby Manoharan Vs the Employees Provident Fund Organization

M/S Turbo Intertrade Company India(P) Ltd. Vs Union of India

Lissie Hospital, Vs Labour Court, Ernakulam

Bank of Baroda Vs State of Kerala