Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/2801/2013 of Devendra Singh Rawat Vs State Of Uttarakhand AND OTHERS on 28 December 2013
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2801 of 2013 Devendra Singh Rawat … Petitioner Vs State of Uttarakhand & others … Respondents Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate, present for the petitioner Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Additional C.S.C., present for the State of
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2801 of 2013
Devendra Singh Rawat
… Petitioner
Vs
State of Uttarakhand & others … Respondents Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate, present for the petitioner Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Additional C.S.C., present for the State of Uttarakhand Mr. Anant Kumar Agarwal, Advocate, present for respondent No. 5.
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Vakalatnama has been filed by Mr. Anant Kumar Agarwal, Advocate, on behalf of respondent No. 5. The same is taken on record.
2. This writ petition has been filed by a workman, who is aggrieved by his transfer order dated 18.02.2013 by the employer i.e. M/s Varroc Engineering Pvt. Ltd. transferred him from Pant Nagar (present place) to Aurangabad Maharshtra. He also claims to be elected President of the Worker Union and alleges mala fide on the part of the employer of his transfer.
3. It is an admitted position that the petitioner had filed an application before the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Udham Singh Nagar with copy to Assistant Labour Commissioner on which the Assistant Labour Commissioner started conciliation proceedings. However, there is a report of the Assistant Labour Commissioner that the employer i.e. respondent No. 5 has not come in the conciliation proceedings.
4. In view of this Court, the matter is disposed of with a direction to the Deputy Labour Commissioner to take a decision in the matter, in accordance with law and while doing so, he shall also consider making a reference under the Industrial Dispute Acts or to take any suitable action permitted under the law, particularly, considering the report of the Assistant Labour Commissioner. It is further made clear that the Deputy Labour Commissioner shall take decision in the matter in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, but preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
28.12.2013 Aswal
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)