SHYAM SUNDER SHARMA SWAMI v. LABOUR COURT NO. 2 AND ANR
CW/5146/2001 · 2025-08-07
Anand Sharma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7271 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7271 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:30508] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5146/2001 Shyam Sunder Sharma Sawai S/o Shri Kashinath Sharma, 11/844, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus
1. Labour Court No.2, Jaipur.
2. M/s Bagheria Medical And General Store, Jln Marg, Soni Hospital, Kanauta Bagh, Jaipur. Present Adress Through Its Proprietor Mr Amti Kumar Bagheriea, C-14, Roop Vihar Colony, Near Karauli Farm, Mohan Marg, Anand Path, New Sanganer Road, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 07/08/2025
1. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner, even in the second round.
2. Bare perusal of the writ petition would reveal that the petitioner prayed for a direction to quash and set aside order dated 10.04.2001 passed by the Labour Court No.2, Hasanpura, Jaipur (for short ‘the Labour Court’) to the extent to which benefits of over time were not allowed to the petitioner.
3. I have examined the record and find that categorical finding has been given by the Labour Court that in absence of any award or settlement with regard to payment of wages for ‘over time’, no such benefit can be granted for over time. The Labour
[2025:RJ-JP:30508] (2 of 2) [CW-5146/2001] Court has also recorded that no such award or settlement was placed on record by the petitioner.
4. Vide order dated 10.04.2001, the Labour Court has decided Application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 where the jurisdiction of the Court is very limited and without there being any award or settlement in respect of grant of benefit of ‘over time’, no computation could have been made by the Labour Court.
5. Hence, no error whatsoever has been committed by the Labour Court in passing the impugned order.
6. I find no ground to interfere in the writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed.
(ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /9