Dismissed

M/S Madhubani Exports v. Labour Officer Gurgaon & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC29 Aug 2012CWP/16743/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bench discharged duty of High Court in Chambers by dismissing the petition challenging an award of Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II regarding a workman's claim for determination of arrears of wages under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

What did the court decide?

Petition under C.W.P. No. 16743 of 2012 is dismissed challenging the Tribunal's award.

M/S Madhubani Exports Vs Labour… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

C.W.P. No. 16743 of 2012 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

C.W.P. No. 16743 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.8.2012

¶4

M/s Madhubani Exports

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

v. Labour Officer and others

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

¶9

Present: Mr. Ved Parkash, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶11

Challenge in the present petition is to the award dated 4.3.2010, passed by Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon (for short, 'the Tribunal') passed in an application filed by respondent No. 2-workman under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') claiming wages for the period from 1.5.2002 to 30.10.2008.

¶12

The claim of respondent No. 2-workman was considered by the Tribunal and in paragraph 7 thereof, a specific finding has been recorded to the effect that prior to the filing of the present application, respondent No. 2 had earlier filed application No. 101 of 2002 under Section 33-C(2) of the Act, which was allowed on 19.2.2008 and respondent No. 2 was held entitled to a sum of ` 11,402.36 on account of wages. In the aforesaid application, respondent No. 2 had claimed back wages for the period from 1.12.2001 to 30.4.2002. In the order passed in the said application, it has already been held that services of respondent No. 2 were wrongly terminated on 28.12.2001, but in terms of the settlement arrived at between

¶13

C.W.P. No. 16743 of 2012 [2]

¶14

the parties on 4.2.2002, respondent No. 2 was paid wages from 1.12.2001 to 30.4.2002.

¶15

Once it has already been held by the Tribunal in the earlier application filed by respondent No. 2 claiming wages that her services had been terminated on 28.12.2001, still in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties on 4.2.2002, she was paid wages for the period from 1.12.2001 to 30.4.2002, to claim wages for the period subsequent thereto, there was no material produced on record showing that respondent No. 2 had been working but not paid wages.

¶16

For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find that any illegality has been committed by the Tribunal while passing the impugned award.

¶17

Dismissed.

¶18

( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge

¶19

29.8.2012 mk

M/S Madhubani Exports v. Labour Officer Gurgaon & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Madhubani Exports v. Labour Officer Gurgaon & Ors.

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

Daljit Singh Gill Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Lakhvinder Singh (3) Vs Food Corp. of India and Anr.

Suhvir Singh Sidhu Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jagjit Singh and Anr. Vs Indian Overseas Bank and Ors.

Major Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Ashwani Puri Vs the Chairman LIC of India and Ors.