CHUNNU KHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court in the matter of refusal by Central Government to make reference of industrial dispute for adjudication before the Central Government-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur. The communication of refusal to make reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, dated 11-7-2011 is under challenge in this writ petition. The reason for refusal is purportedly is belated dispute of 15 years. The facts necessary for disposal of this petition are that, undisputedly petitioner served the Railways Institute as casual labour in two spells; one from 1-6-1990 to 3-8-1990 and second from 4-8-1990 to 2-7-1991 totalling 333 days. Thereafter, for the reasons best known to the respondents/Railway Institute, petitioner's services were discontinued without notice to him and without compensation. Petitioner was running from pillar to post seeking continuity of his employment but to no avail. No sooner did he come to know about the circular of the respondents relating to regularisation of casual labourers issued in year 1996, petitioner immediately approached the Competent Authority by making a representation in prescribed proforma on 16-2-2000. It appears that the representation was kept in file and gathered dust. It did not receive any attention/consideration for a considerable long period by the Competent Authority. Petitioner again made a representation on 2-12-2002 (Annexure P-7), but even that did not yield any result. As suggested to the petitioner, the petitioner submitted a representation with more documents for consideration by the Competent Authority on 13-1-2003, but to no avail. Eventually, the petitioner having exhausted all possible efforts, sent a legal notice through his Advocate on 8-11-2004 (Annexure P-10), but respondents even did not respond the legal notice and in fact inertia was maintained.

(2.) Petitioner moved to the Assistant Labour Commissioner raising industrial dispute regarding discontinuation of his employment by the respondents. The dispute was seized by the Regional Labour Commissioner notices were issued to the respondents. After protracted discussion on various dates as reflected from the report, the conciliation proceedings ended in failure and ultimately on 27-1-2011, the Regional Labour Commissioner, sent his failure report to the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi (Annexure P-15). The Central Government by the impugned communication refused to make reference, purportedly for the reason that the dispute is of belated period of 15 years.

(3.) Respondent No. 3 contended that the petitioner never worked with the Railway Administration, he was serving in the Railway Institute, which is not a part of Western Railway and supported the order passed by the Central Government, impugned herein.