This court allowed a writ petition challenging an order computing unpaid wages under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which stemmed from an award subsequently set aside by this court. The petitioner was ordered to set aside the impugned order.
The writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 10.7.2001 is set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.
O R D E R
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.1347/2002.
: :
RSRTC, Jhalawar Vs. Abdul Wahid & Anr.
: : Date of Order 4.3.2009
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Mr. Ashok Bansal for the petitioner. Mr. Akhil Simlote for the respondent.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that impugned order dated 10.7.2001 passed under Section 33-C (2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is an order of computation of unpaid wages consequent upon implementation of award passed by Labour Court against the petitioner on 20.5.1993. The petitioner preferred a writ petition being SB Civil Writ Petition No.3310/1994 against the aforesaid award. The writ petition filed by the petitioner (SBCWP No.3310/1994) against the aforesaid award has been allowed by this Court on 12.10.2006 and the aforesaid award has been set aside.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent is not in position to dispute this fact, but that as per his
2
information the sole respondent has expired and in spite of his informing his legal representative, no one has come forward to substantiate him.
In the normal course, the petitioner should have taken steps to bring the legal heirs on record, but in the peculiar facts of the case, when the award dated 20.5.1993 has been set aside, the petition deserves to succeed.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.7.2001 is set aside.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J.
A.Arora/Item No.31.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition deserves success when the impugned order is consequential upon an award that has been set aside.
Steps to be taken by the petitioner regarding legal heirs of an expired sole respondent when the consequential award is nullified.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
RSRTC, Jhalawar
Abdul Wahid & Anr
MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
