Madras High Court
The Workmen Of Koyas Fastners ... vs The Joint Commissioner Of Labour on 9 August, 2023
W.P.No.28616 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.28616 of 2017
And
W.M.P.No.30782 of 2017
The workmen of Koyas Fastners Private Limited
Through United Labour Federation
Rep. by its Secretary ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Joint Commissioner of Labour,
Certifying Officer Under
Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act,
th
6 Floor, DMS Compound,
Teynampet,
Chennai – 600 006.
2.The Management of Koyas
Private Limited ... Respondents
Prayer:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records in
connection with the Certified Standing Order dated 05.06.2017 passed
by the first respondent in Standing Orders Case File No.3806/2016 and
quash the same.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28616 of 2017
For Petitioner : Ms.M.Karthikeyani
For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Prem Kumar for R1
Government Advocate
Mr.C.K.Chandrasekaran for R2
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of
Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records in connection with
the Certified Standing Order dated 05.06.2017 passed by the first
respondent in Standing Orders Case File No.3806/2016 and quash the
same.
2.The case of the petitioner is that the second respondent
submitted draft Standing Order before the first respondent and the
petitioner submitted its objection, however, without hearing the
petitioner, the first respondent approved the Standing Order submitted
by the second respondent. Challenging the same, the petitioner has
filed this writ petition.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that similar issue came up for consideration before the Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1283 of 2019 (The Management of
Severn Glocon India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s.United Labour
Federation) and the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28616 of 2017
22.10.2021 remanded back the matter to the Joint Commissioner of
Labour for fresh consideration. Hence, this Court may set aside the
impugned order and remand the matter back to the first respondent
for fresh consideration and issue direction to the first respondent to
hear the petitioner through Advocate and to pass appropriate orders
within a reasonable time frame.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent did
not dispute the fact submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner.
5.Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the
materials available on record.
6.Admittedly, the second respondent submitted draft Standing
Order before the first respondent and the petitioner submitted its
objection, however, without hearing them, the first respondent
approved the Standing Order submitted by the second respondent.
7.It is useful to extract hereunder the relevant portion of the
judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court made in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28616 of 2017
W.A.No.1283 of 2019 (The Management of Severn Glocon India
Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s.United Labour Federation) dated 22.10.2021:
“3. As contended by Mr.V.Prakash,
learned Senior Counsel appearing for the first
respondent/writ petitioner-Federation, when
several documents were produced by the first
respondent-Federation raising objections to the
Draft Standing Orders, instead of allowing the
parties to adduce evidence in support of their
respective objections, unfortunately, the
second respondent has simply brushed aside
the objections and certified the Draft Standing
Orders by the order impugned in the writ
petition. Therefore, the learned single Judge,
finding fault with the approach adopted by the
second respondent, after setting aside the
order impugned, has rightly remanded the
matter back to the second respondent to
consider the issue afresh after affording
reasonable opportunity to both the first
respondent-Federation and the Management
before granting any certification to the Draft
Standing Orders. Hence, finding no infirmity
with the impugned order, the writ appeal fails
and it is dismissed. Needless to state that the
second respondent shall complete the enquiry,
after affording reasonable opportunity to both
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28616 of 2017
parties, and pass appropriate orders on merits
within a period of six months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently,
interim order stands vacated and the
C.M.P.No.8751 of 2019 is also dismissed.
However, there is no order as to costs.”
8.In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court made in W.A.No.1283 of 2019 (The Management of Severn
Glocon India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s.United Labour Federation) dated
22.10.2021, the Certified Standing Order dated 05.06.2017 passed by
the first respondent in Standing Orders Case File No.3806/2016 is set
aside and the matter is remanded back to the first respondent for
fresh consideration. The first respondent shall hear the petitioner
through Advocate and shall also hear the second respondent and
thereafter pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9.The writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
09.08.2023
pri
Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order
Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28616 of 2017
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
pri
To
1.The Joint Commissioner of Labour,
Certifying Officer Under
Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act,
th
6 Floor, DMS Compound,
Teynampet,
Chennai – 600 006.
W.P.No.28616 of 2017
And
W.M.P.No.30782 of 2017
09.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
