LAWS(P&H)-2000-7-3

SHAMBHU NATH TIWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On July 03, 2000
SHAMBHU NATH TIWARI Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER who was employed by respondents 1 and 3 was asked to quit w. e. f. May 5, 1989. He filed a demand notice before respondent No. 1. However, no reference was made to the Labour Court. The respondent vide Annexure R-4, has produced an order. It being a very short order, the relevant part can be reproduced, which is as under : "i am directed to refer to the failure of conciliation report No. 8 (89)/97-ACH. 1 dated September 3, 1998 from the Asstt. Labour Commissioner (C), Chandigarh. Received in this Ministry on September 8, 1998 on the above subject and to say that prima facie this Ministry does not consider this dispute fit for the following reasons : "the dispute has been raised belatedly after a lapse of more than 8 years without any justification for the long delay. "

(2.) IT appears from the above quoted portion that reference was not made on account of delay. Learned counsel for the petitioner has cited before us the case of Ajaib Singh v. The Sirhind Co-operative Marketing cum Processing Service Society Ltd. and Anr. AIR 1999 SC 1351 : 1999 (6) SCC 82 : 1999-I-LLJ-1260. Disagreeing with the judgment of this Court in Ram Chander Morya v. State of Haryana 1999 (1) SCT 141, the Apex Court has held that the provisions of Article 137 of the Limitation Act were not applicable in the proceedings under the Act and the relief cannot be denied to the workman only on the ground of delay. This being so, we find that respondent No. 1 has erred in rejecting the demand notice on the ground of delay.

(3.) WE, therefore, allow this writ petition and direct respondent No. 1 to consider the case of the petitioner for making a reference to the Labour Court, keeping in mind the principles laid down in the judgment by the Apex Court. The respondent No. 1 is directed to take a decision within a period of three months from the receipt of the copy of the order from this Court or production of the certified copy thereof by the petitioner, whichever is earlier.