High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/27133/2016dismissed

Virender Singh v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2022-08-31Mr. Justice Rajbir Sehrawat2 pages

CWP-27133-2016 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-27133-2016 Date of Decision: 31.08.2022 Virender Singh ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ......... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJBIR SEHRAWAT Present :

Mr. Dinesh Nagar, Advocate, for Mr. Ashwani Bakshi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Harish Rathee, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3.

Mr. Sukhsharan Sra, Advocate, for Mr. Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate, for respondent No.4.

***** RAJBIR SEHRAWAT, J. (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 3 to take necessary legal action against respondents No.4 and 5 under Section 25(U) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for violating the settlement dated 22.03.2010 (Annexure P-3) signed between the parties under Section 12(3) of the Act.

Vide order dated 10.11.2017, this Court had directed respondents No.1 to 3 to file an affidavit stating therein as to what action was being taken by them against respondents No.4 and 5 on the complaint made by the petitioner.

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2022.09.02 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CWP-27133-2016 -2Pursuant to that, the Labour Commissioner, Haryana, (respondent No.2 herein) had filed an affidavit dated 13.12.2017 stating therein that on the complaint of the petitioner, a detailed speaking order dated 08.12.2017 was passed and the same was issued on 12.12.2017, whereby the grievance of the petitioner for sanctioning prosecution of respondent No.4-management has been rejected because neither the settlement was found nor any unfair labour practice was found to have been committed by respondent No.4-management.

In view of the above, the present petition has been rendered infructuous.

Dismissed as having been rendered as infructuous. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail any other remedy against the order passed by the authority, but in accordance with law.

(RAJBIR SEHRAWAT) JUDGE 31.08.2022 adhikari Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2022.09.02 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment