Fill in the following details to e-mail
To
Cc
Subject
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> </head> <body> <div style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size:12px; text-align:justify"> <table width="800" border="0" style="border:1px solid #ccc;padding:5px;" align="center" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> <br /> High Court of Delhi <br /><br /> Order issued by the Assistant Labour Commissioner would not act as a bar to approach the Labour Court individually/independently<br /><br /> MANU/DE/2246/2022 - (04 Jul 2022)<br /><br /> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. Ram Raj and Ors.</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" style="background-color:#FDEDCE"><strong>The challenge in present petition is to an order of the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) Delhi ('ALC'), in his capacity as Conciliation Officer and also to a notice issued to the Petitioner by the Presiding Officer, ('Labour Court') in pursuance to reference being made to the Labour Court for adjudication of the dispute under Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('ID Act'). <br><br> Under Section 2A of the ID Act, the Respondents can independently approach the Tribunal challenging their termination. Even if the impugned order has been issued by the ALC, the same would not act as a bar for the Respondents to approach the Labour Court individually/independently. <br><br> It cannot be said that, the issue raised by the Respondents herein is not an industrial dispute. It is the case of the Respondents that, there is a relationship of employer-employee between the Petitioner and the Respondents and as such they have sought regularisation of their services with the petitioner, Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL). <br><br> It is also noted that, an Industrial Dispute with regard to 164 workers is already pending adjudication and there is no reason to deny the remedy of approaching the Labour Court independently by way of a fresh petition, by these four workers. <br><br> The Petitioner would be within its right to take all objections on the maintainability of the claim petition, on the grounds that there is no employer-employee relationship, the claim is a stale claim, the petition is barred by delay and laches, etc., which objections shall be adjudicated by the Labour Court. Petition dismissed.</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" ><strong></strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" ><strong>Tags : Dispute, Adjudication, Authority</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> </td> </tr> <tr> <!--<td><strong>Source : <a target="_new" href="http://www.manupatrafast.com/">newsroom.manupatra.com</a></strong></td>--> <td align="left" valign="top"><strong>Source : newsroom.manupatra.com</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Regards</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Team Manupatra</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> </td> </tr> </table> </div> </body> </html>