United Spirits Ltd vs State Of Rajasthan

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 967 Raj
Judgement Date : 24 January, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
United Spirits Ltd vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 January, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Mehta

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 852/2023 United Spirits Ltd., A Company Incroporated In India Under The Companies Act, 1956 And Having Its Registered Office At Ub Tower, 24 Vittal Mallya Road, Banglore-560001, With Its Local Udaipur Unit At Udaisagar Road, Madri Industrial Area, Udaipur - 313003, Through Its Senior General Manager And Authorized Signatory Mr. Bhupendra Singh S/o Shri Vikram Singh Aged About 47 Years.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Labour Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Deputy Secretary, Labour Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. Industrial Disputes Tribunal And Labour Court, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

4. Shri Gheesulal S/o Shri Bhairulal Ji Nagarachi, Piprauli Tehsil Mawli Jila, Udaipur.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Shivangshu Naval with Mr. Pratik
                                Jain & Mr. Gapal Sandu
For Respondent(s)         :



                     JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                     Order

24/01/2023

1. Mr. Shivangshu, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.4 before the Conciliation Officer and even in the claim petition (at the time of filing claim) had stated his date of termination from service to be 01.10.2010. And thereafter, he became wiser and got the date mentioned in the reference (Downloaded on 24/01/2023 at 11:40:05 PM) (2 of 2) [CW-852/2023] amended to 31.08.2010, that too behind the back of the petitioner.

2. While inviting Court's attention towards the calculation of number of days given in the reply to the claim petition, learned counsel argued that if the date of termination is reckoned as 01.10.2010, it is clear that the respondent had not worked for more than 240 days.

3. He argued that the petitioner - company was thus not required to observe mandate of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

4. Matter requires consideration.

5. Issue notice. Issue notice of the stay application also, returnable within six weeks.

6. Meanwhile, effect and operation of the impugned judgment and award dated 18.08.2022 shall remain stayed to the extent of payment of back wages.

7. It will however be required of the petitioner-company to reinstate the respondent or pay monthly wages as per mandate of Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 310-Arvind/-

(Downloaded on 24/01/2023 at 11:40:05 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)