Disposed

A.Narayanan v. The General Manager

Madras HC10 Apr 2019WP/5691/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition under Article 226 challenging the non-implementation of a Labour Court award was disposed of on the ground that the statutory remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act to file an execution petition is the appropriate course of action. The court held that a writ jurisdiction was not the correct forum.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to file an execution petition before the Competent Court of Law. No order as to costs.

A.Narayanan Vs The General Manager — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 10.04.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.No.5691 of 2018

¶6

A.Narayanan

¶7

... Petitioner
..Vs..
1.The General Manager
Southern Railway
Moore Market Complex
Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.
2.The Presiding Officer
Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum
Labour Court
No.26, Shastri Bhavan
Haddows Road
Chennai – 600 006.
.. Respondents

¶8

PRAYER : Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to implement the award dated 15.11.2010 passed in Industrial Dispute No.24 of 2008 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai/second respondent herein by passing appropriate orders of payment of full back wages, continuity of service and all attendant benefits within a time limit to be fixed by this Honourable Court.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganesan
For R1 : No appearance
O R D E R

¶10

The relief as such sought for in the present writ petition is for a direction to direct the first respondent to implement the award dated 15.11.2010 passed in Industrial Dispute No.24 of 2008 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

cum-Labour Court, Chennai/second respondent herein by passing appropriate orders of payment of full back wages, continuity of service and all attendant benefits.

¶13

2.This Court is the considered opinion that the Industrial Disputes Act under the amended Provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, the petitioner has to file an Execution petition before the Competent Court of Law for the purpose of implementing the award passed by the Labour Court. In the regard, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Competent Court of Law for the purpose of implementation of the award passed by the Labour Court.

¶14

3.Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The General Manager
Southern Railway
Moore Market Complex
Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.
2.The Presiding Officer
Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum
Labour Court
No.26, Shastri Bhavan
Haddows Road
Chennai – 600 006.
+1cc to M/S.P.T.Ramkumar, Advocate Sr.35745
W.P.No.5691 of 2018
ppa[co]
srg 6/6/2019

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

A.Narayanan v. The General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Narayanan 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

S.Vedahnadham Vs The Commissioner

Mariyayee, W/o.Maruthai Vs The District Collector

D.Chandrasekaran Vs The Tamilnadu Agricultural University

B.Thandavamurthy Vs The University of Madras

P.Manivannan Vs The Director of Higher

M.Suresh Vs Vikram Kapur