Citation : 2009 Latest Caselaw 3626 Del
Judgement Date : 8 September, 2009
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C.) No. 11439/2009
% Date of Decision: 08th September, 2009
# M/S BHARAT HOTELS LTD.
..... PETITIONER
! Through: Mr. Lalit Bhasin, Advocate.
VERSUS
$ UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
.....RESPONDENTS
^ Through: Mr. Ravinder Aggarwal, Advocate.
CORAM:
Hon'ble MR. JUSTICE S.N. AGGARWAL
1. Whether reporters of Local paper may be allowed to see the judgment? NO
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NO
S.N.AGGARWAL, J (ORAL) The management of M/s Bharat Hotels Ltd. (petitioner herein) seeks
to challenge an order dated 04.05.2009 passed by the Labour Court on
its application to fix the case for final arguments.
2. Mr. Lalit Bhasin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, has drawn attention of this Court to an order dated 16.10.2004
passed by the Labour Court by which the issue relating to validity of the
inquiry was struck off as the workman had not questioned the validity of
the domestic inquiry held against her. The contention of Mr. Bhasin is
that since the workman had not questioned the validity of the domestic
inquiry and as the issue relating to fairness of the inquiry was struck off
by the Court on 16.10.2004, there was no need for fixing the case for
evidence by the Labour Court.
3. I do not agree with the submission made on behalf of the petitioner.
The Labour Court in its impugned order has clarified that the parties have
been asked to produce their evidence on Issue No. 2 which pertained to
the terms of reference. Since the workman did not dispute the fairness
or legality of the domestic inquiry, the Court below need not go into the
question relating to fairness of the inquiry. The evidence that was
required to be produced by the parties was only on the question of
quantum of punishment. The issue relating to fairness of the inquiry was
struck off way back on 16.10.2004, cannot be re-opened and this position
has been made clear by the Labour Court in its impugned order. For that
reason, I do not find any perversity in the impugned order that may call
for an interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary
discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India. Needless to say that both the parties to the industrial dispute will
be entitled to challenge the final award on all such grounds as may be
available to them in law.
In view of the above, this writ petition along with stay application, is
dismissed in limine.
September 08, 2009 S.N.AGGARWAL, J 'bsr'
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!