WPMS/651/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 1077 UK

                     Office Notes, reports,
SL.                 orders or proceedings or
          Date                                                COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                 directions and Registrar's
                     order with Signatures


      01.04.2022
                                                WPMS No. 651 of 2022
                                                Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Addl. CSC, for the State.

The petitioner is a registered trade union of the workers, who are employed with respondent No. 5 herein.

The petitioners have raised their cause, as against the order dated 16.03.2022, which has been passed by respondent No. 5, for the purposes of imposing a lockout in the unit of respondent No. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends, that for the purposes of settling the controversy, there already happens to be a simultaneous proceeding of conciliation, which are contemplated to be resorted to under sub Section (d) of Section 3 of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. But, for the purposes of questioning the action taken by the notice dated 16.03.2022, the appropriate recourse available to the petitioner union, would be to approach the State under Section 3(a) and 3(b) of the Act, for seeking an appropriate action, against the action of lockout, which is being intended to be taken by respondent No. 5.

This writ petition is being disposed of with the direction to respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4, to consider the application of the petitioners, if at all it is moved by them within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment, and it's the State who would pass an appropriate order, if at all, required after considering the aspect of the set of allegation relating to the lockout, which the unit of respondent No. 5, is intending to impose. This order would be with a slight clarification, that pendency of the conciliation under Section 3(d) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, will not create any impediment for the State for passing of an order under Section 3(a) and 3(b) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act.

As soon as the petitioner moves the application under Section 3(a) and 3(b), the State would consider and pass an appropriate order on it, as per law, within a period of six weeks thereafter.

Let a certified copy of this order be issued today itself, as per rules.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 01.04.2022 Mahinder/