LAXMIPRAKASH GARMENTS PVT. LTD. Vs. BAJRANG SINGH RATHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided in the following parts: - INDEX (1) Details of Writ Petition Factual Matrix and (2) Submissions (3) Analysis (4) Judgments Referred (5) Observations (6) Conclusion (7) Additional Directions Details of the Writ Petition: 1. By way of filing of this writ petition, the challenge has been made to the impugned order dtd. 29/5/2024 passed by the Labour Court-I, Jaipur in LCC Case No.01/2000 by which the application filed by the respondent-workman under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading the petitioner as party has been allowed. Factual Matrix and Submissions:

(2.) At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-Company has no concern whatsoever with the M/s Autopal Industries Limited (for short "respondent-Company"). Counsel submits that an industrial dispute is lying pending between the said Company and the respondent-workman. Counsel submits that a piece of land was sold by respondent-Company M/s Autopal Industries Limited to the petitioner-Company vide registered sale deed dtd. 10/10/2019. Counsel submits that simply on the basis of the said sale deed, the petitioner-Company cannot be impleaded as party to the lis pending between the respondent-workman and respondent- Company M/s Autopal Industries Limited. Counsel submits that the petitioner has nothing to do with the rights and liabilities of M/s Autopal Industries Limited, as he has simply purchased a piece of land and on that basis no liability of M/s Autopal Industries Limited can be fastened upon the petitioner, hence, under these circumstances, the petitioner is neither necessary nor proper party to the matter pending before the Labour Court. Counsel submits that this objection was taken by the petitioner before the Labour Court, but the Labour Court by misinterpreting the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/s Arafat Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s J.K. Staff Association, Kota and Anr. (SB Civil Writ Petition No.12663/2018) dtd. 8/8/2019, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has held that the petitioner is a necessary party and accordingly the petitioner has been impleaded as party. Counsel submits that the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/s Arafat Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case, as in the aforesaid matter, there was a tripartite agreement between M/s Arafat Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. and M/s J.K. Staff Association, but in the instant case, no such tripartie agreement has been executed between the respondents and the petitioner-Company is free from all kinds of liabilities and encumbrances against the respondent-workman and the respondent-Company M/s Autopal Industries Limited. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted and the impugned order dtd. 29/5/2024 is liable to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- workman opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner- Company and submitted that the services of the respondent-workman were illegally terminated by the erstwhile respondent- Company i.e. M/s Autopal Industries Limited and more than 40 litigations of workmen are pending against the respondent- Company M/s Autopal Industries Limited before the Labour Court. Counsel submits that in order to escape from its liability, certain part of the property was sold by the respondent-Company M/s Autopal Industries Limited to the petitioner-Company, by executing a registered sale deed on 10/10/2019. Counsel submits that after receiving the consideration amount from the petitioner, the erstwhile employer i.e. M/s Autopal Industries Limited (respondent-Company) approached the National Company Law Tribunal (for short "NCLT") for declaring it as "insolvent". Counsel submits that the aforesaid action of the respondent-Company makes it liable for the offence under Sec. 206 Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC"). Counsel submits that in case, any award is passed by the Labour Court in favour of the workman, then certainly the petitioner- Company would also be entitled to obey the same, hence, under these circumstances, the Labour Court has not committed any error in allowing the application filed by the workman for impleading the petitioner-Company as party to the lis pending between him and the respondent-Company M/s Autopal Industries Limited. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Karnataka High Court in the case of M.N. Cariappa vs. Smt. Rosamma and Others reported in 2013 (138) FLR 247 . Counsel submits that in view of the submissions made herein above, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be rejected. Analysis: