Dismissed

M/S Abdul Karim Bhai Stone Con v. Kripa Shankar, Kota

Rajasthan HC2 Aug 2024CW/6930/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected a successive writ petition challenging a termination award. The Court held that the matter had been finally disposed of in a prior writ petition (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.615/1997). The petition was barred by the principle of res judicata and declared not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

Rejection of the writ petition as it is barred by res judicata.

M/S Abdul Karim Bhai Stone Con Vs Kripa… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6930/2006

¶3

M/s. Abdul Karim Bhai Stone Contractor, Post Bhodak, District Kota, Through Prop. Abdul Karim (Since deceased) through his son Mefooz Ali

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Kripa Shankar S/o Mohanlal Through Hindu Mazdoor Sabha, Bangali Colony, Chawni, Kota

¶7

Judge, Industrial Tribunal Central, Kota, Rajasthan

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Singh For Respondent(s) : Ms. Nidhi Sharma

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶11

Order

¶12

02/08/2024

¶13

The instant writ petition has been filed against the impugned award dated 09.05.1996 passed by the Industrial Tribunal (Central) Kota, Rajasthan in I. D. (Central) Case No.9/90 by which termination of the respondent-workman was declared as invalid and he was ordered to be reinstated back in service with continuity in service and back wages.

¶14

At the outset, it has been brought into notice of this Court by counsel for the respondents that the same impugned award dated 09.05.1996 was assailed by the same petitioner by way of filing S. B. Civil Writ Petition No.615/1997 before this Court and the said writ petition, filed by the petitioner was rejected by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.07.2003. Counsel submits that now a successive writ petition with regard to the

¶15

[CW-6930/2006]

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

same prayer, challenging the same impugned award dated 09.05.1996, has been preferred and the same is not maintainable. Hence under these circumstances, the petition is liable to be rejected on this count alone.

¶18

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 4. Perusal of the record indicates that the impugned award dated 09.05.1996 passed by the Industrial Tribunal (Central) Kota, Rajasthan in I. D. (Central) Case No.9/90 has been challenged by the petitioner in the instant case. The perusal of the order dated 07.07.2003 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.615/1997 title as M/s. Abdul Karim Bhai Vs. Shri Kripa Shankar & Anr., indicates that the similar award was challenged by the petitioner before this Court and the said writ petition was dismissed with the following observations and directions passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court:-

¶19

“Petitioner has challenged the award dated 09.05.1996 passed by the Industrial Tribunal (Central), Kota, by which while holding the termination of services of respondent No.1, the concerned workman, as illegal and unjustified, the concerned workman has been held entitled for reinstatement with full backwages.

¶20

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone the material on record as also the impugned award passed by the Tribunal.

¶21

Since it is a finding of fact based on the evidence and material on record and proper discretion been used by the Tribunal in granting relief, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, I find no error or illegality in the impugned award so as to call for any further interference of this court in the present matter. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly as having no merits. Since the award was passed way back on 09.05.1996; even the termination also relates back to

¶22

(3 of 3) [CW-6930/2006]

¶23

the year 1989; in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to direct the petitioner to reinstate the concerned workman, if already not reinstated, within 30 days from today and also make the entire payment as awarded by the Tribunal, within 30 days thereafter.”

¶24

Since, the impugned award dated 09.05.1996 has been upheld by this Court way back in the year 2003, the petitioner cannot be allowed and permitted to file successive writ petition challenging the same award by way of filing the instant writ petition. The instant writ petition is barred by the principles of res judicata and the same is no maintainable.

¶25

Accordingly, the same is hereby rejected.

¶26

All application(s), pending if any, also stands dismissed.

¶27

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶28

Aayush Sharma/49

M/S Abdul Karim Bhai Stone Con v. Kripa Shankar, Kota

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Abdul Karim Bhai Stone Con v. Kripa Shankar, Kota

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Rajasthan through Principal Secertary Vs Smt Hema Sharma W/O Shri Sandeep Sharma

Kuldeep Singh Rajpoot and Ors. Vs State Education Departmentors

Narendra Singh Rana Vs U O I and Ors.

Susheela Rani D/O Om Prakash Vs Rajasthan Subordinate and Ministerial Services Selection Board

Daya Ram Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Rajendra Kumar Sohaya and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.