Delhi District Court
Industrial Dispute Between vs M/S. Primus Retail Pvt. Limited on 23 July, 2010
IN THE COURT OF SH. MANMOHAN SHARMA
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT NO. XII,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
DID No. 102/09
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE BETWEEN
Sh. Dharamjeet Singh,
S/o. Sh. Shiv Kumar Singh,
R/o. Nehru Gali, Sant Nagar,
Burari, New Delhi.
.............Workman
AND
M/s. Primus Retail Pvt. Limited,
Khasra No. 331/1/2,
Village Rangpuri,
N.H. 8,
New Delhi
..............Management
Date of institution : 23.10.2009
Date of award : 23.07.2010
AWARD
1.This is a Direct Industrial Dispute filed by the workman u/s 10 (4A) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 thereby challenging her termination stated to have taken place on 27.01.2005.
2. The notice of the claim was sent to the management. No written statement was filed by the management.
3. The workman stated on 3.4.2010 that he seeks to file amendment to the statement of claim. A number of opportunities were afforded to workman for the same. There was no appearance on behalf of the workman despite DID No. 102/09 page 1 of 2 awaiting for him till 2.05 PM on 23.7.2010.
4. It has been held in Ishraul Haque Ansari Vs. M.C.D. & Others Delhi High Court 2007 LLR 572 that a party is expected to pursue his case diligently once it has been filed in court.
5. It is on the claim of the workmen that the reference order has been passed. The workmen are not supposed to be complacent and must be aware of the proceedings. under these facts and circumstances it appears that the workmen are left with no cause of dispute against the management. Therefore nodispute award is passed in the above terms.
6. Copy of the award be sent to the Secretary (Labour) Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi for necessary action. The award be also sent to server (www.delhicourts.nic.in). The file be consigned to record room.
7. ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT th ON 23 OF JULY, 2010 (MAN MOHAN SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT NO.XII, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
DID No. 102/09 page 2 of 2