Quashed

Urmila v. Presiding Officer and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Jan 2012CWP/12139/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition challenging a Labour Court award passed in three days with no evidence. The Court found judicial misconduct and diabolical mind, quashing the award and restoring the reference to the Industrial Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

The award passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-I, Faridabad dated 15.2.2010 was quashed, and Reference No. 44/2010 was restored.

Urmila Vs Presiding Officer and Anr. — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No. 12139 of 2010

¶2

- 1-

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 12139 of 2010 Date of Decision: 17.01.2012

Smt. Urmila

……… Petitioner

Versus

The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court-I, Faridabad, Haryana & another

¶9

………… Respondents

¶10

¶11

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA

¶12

Present: Mr.Kunal Dawar, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. O.P. Sharma, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

¶14

¶15

To be referred to the reports or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?

¶16

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.

¶17

This Court is confronted with a bizarre award passed by the Addl. District

¶18

& Sessions Judge / Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court-I, Faridabad dated 15.2.2010 (P-5), which merits reproduction in verbatim:

¶19

“1. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (C) of sub section 1 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 the Governor of Haryana referred the following dispute between the parties mentioned above to this court for adjudication vide Haryana Government Endst. No. 2055-60, dated 27-12010:-

¶20

“Whether the termination of services of Smt. Urmila is justified or not, what relief he is entitled to?”

¶21

2. Brief facts of this case are like this, that the claimant has given a demand notice to the respondent to the effect that she was appointed by the respondent as ‘Checker-cum-Gloves Maker” on 21-2-1994. No appointment letter was given. On 25-3-2009 her services terminated illegally. And prayed she will be taken on job with full back wages.

¶22

3. Reconciliation proceeding took place but to no effect. Hence, the demand notice was culminated into Ref. No. 44/2010, whereby it was to be decided whether his services were terminated illegally? If so, to what

¶23

CWP No. 12139 of 2010

¶24

- 2-

¶25

relief he is entitled?

¶26

4. In the reference the Labour Commissioner, Haryana has directed both the parties to appear in the Court. But claimant has not come present. However, respondent Sh. Rakesh Kumar has appeared. In the present case there is no claim statement nor any evidence of the claimant as onus was on the claimant to prove that her services were terminated illegally. As there being no claim statement nor any evidence, hence, the reference is decided against the claimant holding that she is not entitled to any relief. File be consigned to records.”

¶27

I am left wondering how a Judicial Officer can pass such an order while manning a Labour Court. The date fixed by the Labour Commissioner, Haryana directing both the parties to appear in the Court has been made sacrosanct. The Labour Commissioner, it follows would become an authority superior to the Labour Court. Non-appearance of the claimant on the date fixed by the Labour Commissioner, Haryana has been used to foreclose the workman’s case on merits. The Presiding Officer of the Labour Court mentions a demand notice in para 3 and in para 4 states that since there is no claim statement nor any evidence of the claimant, therefore, the reference deserves to be decided against the claimant. This conclusion has been arrived at in a short span of three days. Reference No. 44/2010 was instituted on 11.2.2010, the award has been passed on 15.2.2010. It is tritely obvious that the demand notice itself could have been treated as a statement of claim and notice issued to the workman and the management. An effective attempt should have been made to bring parties to Court to decide the grievance. It confounds me from where the evidence would come within three days unless there was some readymade evidence recorded by some other competent authority and that was made part of the baggage that came with the reference order. This makes the matter even more bizarre. What the Presiding Officer has done in this case, in my considered view, amounts to judicial misconduct. The order (P-5) is unjust and discloses a diabolical mind endangering the fate of cases that may pass through the hands of such a person. The award (P-5) is quashed. Reference No. 44/2010 is restored on the

¶28

CWP No. 12139 of 2010

¶29

- 3-

¶30

file of the Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court-I, Faridabad. The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court-I, Faridabad would now take all steps in accordance with law and start from where this matter was put to such a brutal end.

¶31

Let a copy of this order be sent by the office to the author of the award (P-5). This order be also circulated to all the Presiding Officers, Labour Courts falling within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.

¶32

17.01.2012

¶33

‘sp’

¶34

(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE

Urmila v. Presiding Officer and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Urmila v. Presiding Officer and Anr.

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

Harish Saini Vs Financial Commissioner & Pri. Se.. to Govt. Hry & Ors.

Maya International and Ors. Vs Jt. Registrar Coop Society Jlr Divn. Jalandhar & Ors.

Tarun Kaur Vs Punjab State ETC.(MAIN5)

Sunil Singh Vs St of Hry & Anr.

Mac Remedies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Labour Commissioner Haryana and Ors.

M/S Kansal Coop House Building Society Ltd. Vs Registrar Coop Societies Pb