Disposed

The Karur Textile Manufacturer v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Madras HC10 Sept 2024WP/515/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenged application of a 2014 minimum wages Government Order to home textile industry members of a Karur exporters' association. The Court noted the G.O. had since been revised by G.O.(Ms)No.179 dated 30.11.2018 categorising Home Textiles separately, redressing the grievance, and disposed the petition as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; writ petition disposed as infructuous in view of subsequent revision of the impugned Government Order.

The Karur Textile Manufacturer Vs The… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.515 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10.09.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

¶6

W.P.No.515 of 2015

¶7

The Karur Textile Manufacturer Exporters' Association, (Regn. No.58/93), 29-C-1, Pugalur Road, Karur - 639 001, Represented by its President M.Nachimuthu ... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

The Government of Tamilnadu, Represented by its Secretary to Government, Labour and Employment Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009. ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondent, their men, officers, agents, servants. representatives and/or any one claiming through or under them and/or any other person from in any manner applying the impugned Government Order in G.O.(2D) No.59, Labour and Employment (J1) Department dated 10.10.2014 and published in Part II- Section 2 of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 03.12.2014 on the members of the

¶11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶12

1/6

¶13

W.P.No.515 of 2015

¶14

petitioner Association who are differently placed as Home Textile Industry and not as Tailoring Industry and accordingly.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj For Respondent : M/s.M.Jayanthy Additional Government Pleader

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

The Writ Petition has been filed forbearing the respondent, their men,

¶18

officers, agents, servants. representatives and/or any one claiming through or under them and/or any other person from in any manner applying the impugned Government Order in G.O.(2D) No.59, Labour and Employment (J1) Department dated 10.10.2014 and published in Part II- Section 2 of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 03.12.2014 on the members of the petitioner Association, who are differently placed as Home Textile Industry and not as Tailoring Industry and accordingly .

¶19

2 . On 13.09.2024, this Court has passed the following order:-

¶20

“This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to forbear from in any manner applying the Government Order in G.O. (2D) No. 59, Labour and Employment (J1) Department dated 10.10.2014 to the members of the petitioner's association.

¶21

2/6

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.No.515 of 2015

¶24

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the above Government Order has no application to the set of employment in which the petitioner's association is engaged, viz., Tailoring Shops, Export Garments Manufacturing, and Administrative Staff therein. The petitioner claims that the Government Order is not applicable to the employees of Home Textile Industry. It is stated that the notification was issued by keeping the petitioner's association and its members outside the Advisory Committee, and hence, this Writ Petition has been filed for issuing direction to the appropriate authorities to forbear from implementing the same against the employees of Home Textile Industry.

¶25

3. The above Government Order was issued in the year 2014 for implementing the minimum wages applicable to the employees of the respective sectors. So far as the petitioner is concerned, their association is of Textile Manufacturing Exporters of Karur, and it appears that the petitioner did not choose to include any of the employees' unions, for whose benefit the Government Order was passed and who will be affected in case the above order is set aside or a direction is given to the authorities concerned not to implement the same.

¶26

4. By virtue of the passage of time, this Writ Petition would have lost its significance, and the matter is adjourned

¶27

3/6

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.No.515 of 2015

¶30

for getting instructions from the respondent about the present position.

¶31

5. List the matter under the caption 'for orders' on 10.09.2024.”

¶32

3 . When the matter is taken up today, it is learnt that the impugned Government Order in G.O.(2D) No.59, Labour and Employment (J1) Department, dated 10.10.2014, has been revised by issuing G.O.(Ms)No.179, Labour and Employment (J2) Department, dated 30.11.2018 by categorising as Home Textiles.

¶33

4 . Since the petitioner's grievance has been redressed in view of

¶34

the subsequent Government Order issued in G.O.(Ms)No.179, Labour and Employment (J2) Department, dated 30.11.2018 , the writ petition itself has become infructuous.

¶35

5 . In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed as

¶36

infructuous . No costs.

¶37

10.09.2024

¶38

Speaking order / Non-speaking order

¶39

4/6

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

W.P.No.515 of 2015

¶42

Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No sri

¶43

¶44

The Secretary, Government of Tamilnadu, Labour and Employment Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

¶45

5/6

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.515 of 2015

R.N.MANJULA, J.

sri

W.P.No.515 of 2015

¶51

10.09.2024

¶52

6/6

¶53

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

The Karur Textile Manufacturer v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Karur Textile Manufacturer v. The Government of Tamilnadu

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

Anjalam Vs The Managing Director

The Amaravathi Co-Operative Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs Appellate Authority

Oivu Petra Theyilai Thotta Paniyalargal Nala Sangam, Vs Supriya Sahu Ias.

The Management Vs the Presiding Officer

Kamala(died) Vs Chittammal

The Special Officer Vs The Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative Societies