Himachal Pradesh High Court
Munshi Ram vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors on 24 November, 2023
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.2111 of 2019
Date of Decision: 24.11.2023
_______________________________________________________
.
Munshi Ram .......Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. ... Respondents
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Parkash Sharma, Advocate.
of
For the Respondents: Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate
General.
_______________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
rt
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated
2.7.2019, issued under the signature of Joint Labour Commissioner,
Himachal Pradesh, whereby prayer made on behalf of the petitioner
to refer the dispute to learned Labour Court-cum- Industrial Tribunal
for adjudication, came to be rejected, petitioner approached this Court
in the instant proceedings, praying therein for following reliefs:-
"(i) That the impugned order dated 2.7.2019,
Annexure P-3 passed by the respondent No.2
may kindly be quashed and set aside;
(ii) That the respondent No.2 may kindly be
directed to make reference of the petitioner to
the learned Labour Court for adjudication of
the matter on merits."
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. Pursuant to the notices issued in the instant proceedings,
respondents have filed reply, wherein prayer made by the petitioner
in the instant petition, came to be opposed on the ground of delay and
.
laches.
3. Before the case at hand could be heard and decided on
its own merit, learned counsel for the petitioner invited attention of
this Court to judgment dated 22.09.2023, passed by Co-ordinate
of
Bench of this Court in CWP No.2112 of 2019, titled Baru Ram versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others, to contend that in similar
rt
facts and circumstances, office order dated 1.7.2019 passed by Joint
Labour Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh, thereby rejecting the
prayer to refer the dispute to Labour Court-cum- Industrial Tribunal for
adjudication on the ground of delay and laches, has been quashed
and set-aside and as such, case of the petitioner is required to be
considered and decided in light of aforesaid judgment passed by Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in Baru Ram case (supra).
4. Having carefully perused the pleadings adduced on
record vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds
that the petitioner in the case at hand as well as petitioners in the
case, as detailed hereinabove, are/were from the same department
and they were disengaged on the same date by the department, but
without complying with the provisions of Industrial Dispute Act. Apart
from above, petitioner herein as well as petitioner namely, Baru Ram
in another case raised industrial demands on the same date and both
were rejected on the ground of inordinate delay that too by one
.
authority i.e. Joint Labour Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh, there
appears to be merit in the contention of learned counsel for the
petitioner that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the
judgment rendered by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Baru Ram
of
case( supra) and as such, no prejudice, if any, would be caused to
either of the parties, if the respondents are directed to consider and
rt
decide the case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment.
5. Consequently, in view of the above, the directions
contained in the aforesaid judgment rendered by Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court in Baru Ram case supra are ordered to be made mutatis
mutandis applicable in the present case for all intents and purposes.
In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of
alongwith pending application(s), if any.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge
November 24, 2023
(shankar)
