PARASRAM PAL Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition is to communication dated 28.03.2017; whereby Labour Commissioner has declined to cause indulgence on an application preferred by the petitioner under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking prosecution of respondent No.2 for non-compliance of award dated 03.12.2014. The said application, as apparent from the order, is dismissed on the ground of limitation.

(2.) Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd. v. A.R. Chacko: [1964 AIR SC 1522 ] and Life Insurance Corporation of India v. D. J. Bahadur and Others: [AIR 1980 SC 2181] it is submitted that the Labour Commissioner has glossed over the stipulations contained in sub-section (6) of Section 19 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which contemplates that the award shall remain in operation unless modified.

(3.) Evidently, Labour Commissioner has relied on Sub-section (3) of Section 19 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which envisages:-