Gujarat High Court
Naval vs Pavankumar on 25 March, 2010
Author: H.K.Rathod
Bench: H.K.Rathod
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/3012/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3012 of 2010
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 2459 of 2010
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3012 of 2010
=========================================================
NAVAL
TECHNOPLAST INDUSTRIES WORKERS'ASSOCIATION - Petitioner(s)
Versus
PAVANKUMAR
AGRAWAL-DIRECTOR NAAL TECHNOPLAST INDIA LTD & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PJ MEHTA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for Respondent(s) :
1,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3.
MRS SANGEETA
N PAHWA for Respondent(s) : 2,
MS SACHI MATHUR, AGP for
Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 25/03/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Heard learned advocate Mr. P.J. Mehta appearing on behalf of petitioner.
The petitioner has challenged the order passed by Conciliation Officer dated 10th February 2010 wherein application has been made by Gujarat Mazdoor Panchayat for claiming protection in favour of protected workmen has been withdrawn by Gujarat Mazdoor Panchayat though learned advocate Mr. Mehta joined as a party to the proceedings. The Conciliation Officer has come to conclusion that individual employee cannot claim a right of protected workmen in absence of Union.
Therefore, considering affidavit-in-reply filed by respondent No.3, according to my opinion, the order passed by Conciliation Officer on 10th February 2010 cannot consider to be a contrary to law. However, if petitioner wants to declare them protected workmen under provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for that, let necessary request is to be made before employer and thereafter, if employer is not giving response, then, to approach Conciliation Officer under the Industrial Disputes (Gujarat) Rules, 1966.
Therefore, in light of above observations, present petition is disposed of by this Court.
Today, when main petition is disposed of by this Court, Civil Application No.2459 of 2010 is also disposed of.
As and when petitioner may approach the employer with a demand of giving protection to certain workmen, it is open for employer to raise all legal contentions which are available and permissible in law against such demand made by petitioner.
In Civil Application No.2459 of 2010, on behalf of Opponent No.1, affidavit-in-reply is filed which is already on record.
[H.K. RATHOD, J.] #Dave Top