Daler Khan vs State of H.P.
- Neutral2017 INSC 1079
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a High Court has rejected an application for reference to the Labour Court solely on the ground of delay, and the Supreme Court has in similar matters previously directed reference notwithstanding the delay objection, the delay ground should be ignored and the case ought to be referred to the Labour Court as a matter of consistency and principle, rather than allow a procedural bar to defeat the substantive claim.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.18012-18013 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS.30103-30104 OF 2017 @ DIARY NO.7296/2015]
DALER KHAN & ORS. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1/State of Himachal Pradesh.
3. This is a case where the appellants could not succeed before the High Court for reference to the Labour Court on the ground of delay. In similar matters, this Court had taken note of the ground for the delay and after finding that in several other similar matters reference had already been made, directed the State to make a reference.
4. We are informed that pursuant to such judgment dated 26.09.2017 rendered in C.A. No.9714/2016 and connected cases, the Labour Court has considered the reference.
5. Therefore, these appeals are allowed with a direction to Respondent No.1 that the cases of the appellants shall also be considered for reference, Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by NARENDRA PRASAD ignoring the objection in the matter of delay.
Date: 2017.11.10 16:47:10 IST Reason: 6. Needful be done within two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
1 7. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
8. There shall be no orders as to costs.
.......................J. [KURIAN JOSEPH]
.......................J. [R. BANUMATHI] NEW DELHI;
NOVEMBER 06, 2017.
2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free