Allowed

Babu Lal Prajapat v. Kimat Kumar and Others

Rajasthan HC14 Sept 2015CCP/919/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this S.B. Civil Contempt Petition arising from Writ Petition on unpaid wages, the High Court held that the petitioner approached the wrong forum. The Court directed the petitioner to file an application under Section 33(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to file an application under Section 33(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act within two weeks.

Babu Lal Prajapat Vs Kimat Kumar and Others — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

1/2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

¶3

ORDER

¶4

S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 919/2012

¶5

Babu Lal Prajapat Vs. Kimat Kumar & Ors. In

¶6

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15161/2010

¶7

Date of order: 14^th September, 2015

¶8

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia

¶9

Mr. Prem Krishan Sharma, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajendra Prasad Sharma, for the respondents.

¶10

The learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 29.2.2012 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15161/2010 had given the following directions:-

¶11

“The wages last drawn by the respondentworkman, shall be paid to him by the petitioners with effect from 25.8.2011. The dues shall be paid within a period of eight weeks from the date a copy of the order is served on the petitioners. The petitioners shall continue to pay to the respondent-workman the monthly salary on month to month basis by 7^th of every month.

¶12

The second application also stands disposed

¶13

of.”

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that entire amount has not been paid. There is a serious dispute regarding the amount due.

¶15

The learned counsel for the respondents has stated that wages of last ten days at the rate of Rs.60 per day has been paid to the workman, whereas the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that calculation made by the respondents is not correct. The attention of the learned counsel for the petitioner has been drawn to Section 33 (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner has very fairly submitted that he will approach the competent

¶16

2/2

¶17

court for redressal of his grievances under Section 33-c of the Industrial Disputes Act. Since the petitioner had approached the wrong forum, therefore, it is ordered that in case the petitioner file an appropriate application within the ambit of Section 33(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, within two weeks from today, the competent court shall decide the said application within three months.

¶18

The learned counsel for the respondents undertakes to appear before the competent court in case copy of the application is served upon him a week prior to the filing. It is further clarified that in case application is filed within stipulated period, the same shall be deemed to be within limitation.

¶19

In view of disposal of the contempt petition, notices issued stands discharged.

¶20

[Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia],J.

¶21

Mak/-

¶22

138

¶23

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.” Anil Makawana P.A.

Babu Lal Prajapat v. Kimat Kumar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Lal Prajapat v. Kimat Kumar and Others

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

Smt Parwati Devi Vs B S Singh and Others

Alka Chaturvedi Vs J K Jain and Another

Sunil and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Atul Kumar Jain and Anr. Vs Raj University of Health Sci Anr.

Balveer Singh Rathore and Ors. Vs Raj University of Health Sci Anr.

Nagrik Grah Nirman Sehkari Vs Kushal Chand Badher andORS