Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhartiya Cement Majdoor Sangh vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 3 February, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:6347]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4577/2024
Bhartiya Cement Majdoor Sangh, Jodhpur Sambhag through its
President Lalit Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramji Lal Sharma, aged
about 62 Yaears R/o 162 Gharwala Jaav Mandiya Road, Pali
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan, through Principal Secretary to
The Labour Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Registrar of Trade Union and Additional Labour
Commissioner, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Additional Registrar of Trade Union and Divisional Joint
Labour Commissioner, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Bhati
For Respondent(s) : --
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN
Order
03/02/2025
1. None appears for the respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the
administrative order dated 13.06.2023 whereby the registration
which was rejected by virtue of award of the Labour Court and by
virtue of order of the Labour Court the rejection of registration
was set aside, the authorities were directed to accord the
registration to the present writ petitioner.
3. The department has assail the award of the Labour Court
before the learned Single Judge by way of Writ Petition
No.6449/2020 and the learned Single Judge vide order dated
21.10.2021 confirmed the award of the Labour Court. Assailing
[2025:RJ-JD:6347] (2 of 3) [CW-4577/2024]
the same department has taken further proceedings by way of
D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.741/2021 and the Division Bench
vide order dated 13.01.2022 has affirmed the finding of the
learned Single Judge which in turn affirm the findings of the
Labour Court. The department further went in Special Leave
Petition (Civil) bearing No.14229/2023 and in Special Leave
Petition the Hon'ble Apex Court has stayed the operation of the
impugned judgment till further order.
2. In pursuance of the stay order, the department has issued a
proceeding dated 13.06.2023 suspending the registration of the
Union-writ petitioner which was granted in pursuance of the award
of the Labour Court. That order is under challenge.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
registration was granted by virtue of award of the Labour Court
and the registration was not granted in pursuance of any direction
given by the Division Bench, therefore, suspension of Division
Bench order would not automatically enabling the authority to
suspend the grant of registration.
4. The facts clearly demonstrate that rejection of renewal was
assailed before the Labour Court and the Labour Court has set
aside the rejection order and directed the respondent to accord
the registration and consequently, registration was accorded to the
petitioner vide order dated 13.12.2021 and the respondents have
assailed the said award before the learned Single Judge. The
learned Single Judge confirmed the award of the Labour Court.
Respondents further went in writ appeal and the writ appellate
Court also confirmed the finding of the learned Single Judge who
in turn confirmed the award of the Labour Court and again that
[2025:RJ-JD:6347] (3 of 3) [CW-4577/2024]
order the respondents further filed Special Leave to Appeal. In the
Special Leave to Appeal (Writ) stay on operation of interim order
was granted.
5. When the principle of doctrine of merger is applied, the
award of Labour Court merges with the order of the learned Single
Judge and both the order merges with the order of the Division
Bench. Once the Division Bench order has been stayed, the effect
and operation of grant of any registration in pursuance of award of
the Labour Court stands suspended. In that background, the
impugned orders have been passed, holding that since the
operation of Division Bench was stayed, the consequential
administrative order has been granted suspending the registration
which was granted in pursuance of the Labour Court award.
6. In view of the above, I do not find any illegality in the
impugned order.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of any merit, is
dismissed.
(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J
22-Dharmendra Rakhecha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
