Delhi High Court - Orders
Management Of M/S Acfoli Inc vs Surender Narayan Singh on 1 March, 2021
Author: Jyoti Singh
Bench: Jyoti Singh
$~A-13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P. (C) 2728/2021
MANAGEMENT OF M/S ACFOLI INC ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Vinay Sabharwal, Advocate.
versus
SURENDER NARAYAN SINGH ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH
ORDER
% 01.03.2021 Hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing. CM No. 8127/2021 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Application is disposed of.
W.P. (C) 2728/2021 By way of the present petition the Petitioner assails the impugned award dated 31.10.2018 passed by the learned Labour Court in LIR No. 2194/2016 (old ID No. 547/2013).
Mr. Vinay Sabharwal learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner firm came into existence with effect from 01.04.1996, however, on account of unavoidable reasons the industry closed with effect from 01.08.2008, pursuant to an order passed by the Haryana State Pollution Control Board dated 28.07.2008. Intimation of closure was sent to the concerned Labour Department at Panipat, Haryana. Upon closure, the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SARABJEET KAUR Signing Date:04.03.2021 18:08:52 registration of the firm under VAT/CST was also surrendered. The Respondent, after six years of closure raised a dispute alleging in the Statement of Claim that he had been working as 'field worker' with effect from 01.03.1983 and his last drawn wage was Rs. 6,200/-. It was alleged that the Respondent was illegally dismissed on 01.01.2013.
Mr. Sabharwal urges that the learned Labour Court has erred in holding that the termination of the Respondent was illegal for the reason that the closure of the firm was without prior permission from the appropriate Government and other requisites of Chapter-VB of the ID Act were not complied with. The contention of the Petitioner is that the provisions of Chapter-VB of the ID Act have no application to the establishment of the Petitioner. A perusal of the provisions of Chapter-VB clearly indicates that the Chapter shall apply to an industrial establishment in which not less than 100 workmen were employed on an average per working day for the preceding 12 months. The workmen never pleaded that the strength of the employees was not less than 100 workers and thus any permission was required from the appropriate Government or that any other requisite of Chapter-VB were not complied with.
Having heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, I prima facie find merit in the argument raised looking to the provisions of Chapter-VB, relevant portion of which is as under, for ready reference:-
"Section 25 (K) Application of Chapter VB. - (1) The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to an industrial establishment (not being an establishment of a seasonal character or in which work is performed only intermittently) in which not less than one hundred workmen were employed on an Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SARABJEET KAUR Signing Date:04.03.2021 18:08:52 average per working day for the preceding twelve months."
"Section 25 (L) Definitions.- For the purposes of this Chapter,--
(a) "industrial establishment" means-- (i) a factory as defined in clause (m) of section 2 of the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948); (ii) a mine as defined in clause (i) of sub- section (1) of section 2 of the Mines Act, 1952 (35 of 1952); or (iii) a plantation as defined in clause (f) of section 2 of the Plantations Labour Act, 1951 (69 of 1951);
(b) notwithstanding anything contained in sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of section 2,-- (i) in relation to any company in which not less than fifty-one per cent. Of the paid-up share capital is held by the Central Government, or (ii) in relation to any corporation [not being a corporation referred to in sub-
clause (i) of clause (a) of section 2] established by or under any law made by Parliament, the Central Government shall be appropriate Government.
Issue notice to the Respondent on the Petitioner taking requisite steps, through all permissible modes, returnable on 06.05.2021. CM No. 8126/2021 (stay) Issue notice to the Respondent on the Petitioner taking requisite steps, through all permissible modes, returnable on 06.05.2021.
Till the next date of hearing, operation of the impugned award dated 31.10.2018 shall remain stayed subject to the Appellant depositing 50% of the awarded amount within a period of two weeks from today with the Registrar General of this Court. The amount so deposited shall be invested in an interest bearing Fixed Deposit in a Nationalised Bank. CM No. 8128/2021 (for addl. documents) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SARABJEET KAUR Signing Date:04.03.2021 18:08:52 Issue notice to the Respondent on the Petitioner taking requisite steps, through all permissible modes, returnable on 06.05.2021.
JYOTI SINGH, J MARCH 01, 2021 yo Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SARABJEET KAUR Signing Date:04.03.2021 18:08:52