SHYAM SUNDAR SHARMA AND ORS v. THE JUDGE LABOUR COURT NO.2 JA
CW/5293/2000 · 2025-04-02
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7818 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7818 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5293/2000 1.Shyam Sunder Sharma son of Shri Krishna Chandra Sharma, aged about 42 years, resident of village & post Aran Kheda, tehsil Ladpura, district Kota.
2. Badri Lal Meena son of Shri Hira Lal Meena, resident of village & post Nakshpura, tehsil Ladpura, district Kota.
3. Prem Prakash son of Shri Ram Nivas, resident of village Gandi Kali, tehsil Ladpura, district Kota.
4. Hira Lal son of Shri Ram Chandra, resident of village & tehsil Ladpura, district Kota. Deceased through Lr’s:- 4/1. Basanti Bai wife of Shri Heera Lal 4/2. Om Prakash son of Shri Heera Lal 4/3. Shanti Lal son of Heera lal All are resident of Village ladpura, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota. ----Petitioners Versus
1. The Judge, Labour Court (No. 2), Jaipur (Raj).
2. Director, Medical & Health Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Director, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. Panchayat Samiti, Ladpura, district Kota throug its Vikas Adhikari. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narendra Mishra For Respondent(s) :
JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order 02/04/2025
1. Matter comes up on interim application No.01/2023 submitted by the counsel for the petitioner under Order 22
(2 of 3) [CW-5293/2000] Rule 3 CPC for substituting the legal representatives of the petitioner No.4 on record.
2. Application stands allowed for the reasons stated therein. Legal representatives of the deceased petitioner No.4 are ordered to be taken on the record.
3. With the consent of the counsel for the petitioner
arguments have been heard.
4. The instant writ petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 26.04.2000 passed by the Labour Court No.2, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Labour Court’), by which application filed by the petitioner under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act of 1947’) has been rejected by treating the same as not maintainable.
5. The petitioner along with other workmen approached the Labour Court for grant of minimum wages by way of filing an application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Act of 1947.
6. The said application submitted by the petitioner has been rejected by the Labour Court by holding that unless and until the dispute raised by the petitioner is not sent by the Appropriate Government through reference under Section 10 of the Act of 1947, the relief sought for cannot be granted by it, in exercise of its powers contained under Section 33(C)(2) of the Act of 1947.
7. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Labour Court has passed a just and reasoned order, which requires no interference of this Court.
(3 of 3) [CW-5293/2000]
8. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/6