Central Government Industrial Tribunal
ID No. 55/2022 Sh. Rakesh Mahto vs Central Warehousing Corporation on 12 November 2025
THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
CUM LABOUR COURT DELHI - 1,
NEW DELHI.
ID No. 55/2022
Sh. Rakesh Mahto S/o Sh. Kamal Mahto, Through General Mazdoor Lal Jhanda Union (Regd.), B-1/A, Shahdra, Delhi-110093.
…Claimant
Versus
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. The Regional Manager, M/s Central Warehousing Corporation, Scope Minar, First Floor, CORE-3, Laxmi Nagar, Distt. - Centre, Delhi-110092.
2. The Manager, M/s Suman Fowarding Agency Pvt. Ltd., Registered Office- 76, G.T. Road (South) Howrah-711101.
3. Suman Fowarding Agency Pvt. Ltd., IDC, Near Ghazipur Village, Patparganj, Delhi-110096.
…Management
AWARD
1. In the present case, a reference was received from the appropriate Government vide letter No-L-42011/21/2022 (IR(M)) dated 04.02.2022 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Act, for adjudication of a dispute, terms of which are as under: The Schedule ‘Whether the demand of the General Mazdoor Lal Jhanda Union for payment of bonus in respect of workman Shri Rakesh Mahto S/o Shri Kamal Mahto for the period from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020 and 01.04.2020 to 31.12.2020 from the Management of M/s Suman Forwarding Agency Pvt. Ltd. under Central Warehousing Corporation, is legal and justified? If yes, what relief the workman is entitled to?’
2. In the reference order, the appropriate Government commanded the parties raising the dispute to file statement of claim, complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses with this Tribunal within 15 days of receipt of the reference order and to forward a copy of such statement of claim to the opposite parties involved in the dispute. Despite directions so given, Claimant union opted not to file the claim statement with the Tribunal.
3. On receipt of the above reference, notice was sent to the workman as well as the managements. Despite service of the notice, claimant opted to abstain away from the proceedings. Appearance on behalf of the claimant is marked only on one occasion. No claim statement was filed on his behalf. Thus, it is clear that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the reference on merits.
4. In these circumstances, where the claimant is not interested in pursuing his case and stopped appearing despite serving notice, this Tribunal is left with no choice, except to pass a ‘No Dispute/Claim’ award. Let this award be sent to the appropriate Government, as required under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for publication.
Date: 12.11.2025
ATUL KUMAR GARG
Presiding Officer
CGIT – cum – Labour Court – I