Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
The Judgment On Which The Counsel Placed ... vs State Of Rajasthan Reported In 2014(10) ... on 24 August, 2015
Bench: Ajay Rastogi, Prakash Gupta
In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench DB Special Appeal (W) No.1788/2014 Date of Order 24.8.2015 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prakash Gupta Mr. Deepak Goyal, for appellant.
Instant special appeal has been preferred against order of the ld. Single Judge impugned dt.27.8.2014.
The appellant employee as alleged had worked as Cattle Guard on muster roll under the Forest Department from 1.1.1979 to 31.3.1983 and as alleged his services have been verbally terminated w.e.f. 1.4.1983. However, application was filed before the Conciliation Officer at the instance of the appellant workman on 27.1.2006. After failure report was furnished by the Conciliation Officer, the State Govt. refused/declined to make reference in exercise of power conferred u/S.12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide order dt.2.7.2008 on the premise that the dispute has been raised after 23 years and no satisfactory explanation has come forward to examine the dispute and that was subject matter of challenge by filing writ petition.
The ld. Single Judge taking note of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court reported in 2001 (1) SCC 424 which came to be further followed in 2001 (6) SCC 222 and observed that if the dispute has been raised after lapse of a considerable inordinate delay the dispute caused starts fading or even eclipse or the very industrial dispute does not exist and taking that to be the basis, the ld. Single Judge was not inclined to interfere in the matter and dismissed the writ petition vide order dt.27.8.2014.
Counsel for appellant has tried to persuade this Court that the explanation furnished to the appellant workman in his application dt.27.1.2006 (Ann.1) that after his services were terminated he approached to the Union and one of the office bearer Chhotey Lal Meena in fact was taking care of his grievance but later on when he came across that no action was taken by Chhotey Lal Meena he immediately approached the Conciliation Officer for ventilating his grievance by filing application dt.27.1.2006.
Even from the explanation furnished in para 10 of the application dt.27.1.2006, this Court cannot give any credence to such vague statement of facts made for seeking condonation of delay in approaching the Conciliation Officer in January 2006 and no tangible evidence came on record and we are also of the view that after such a long lapse of 23 years the very industrial dispute as alleged had eclipsed and faded by passage of time and this what the ld. Single Judge observed in its order impugned dt. 27.8.2014.
The judgment on which the counsel placed reliance in the case Rameshwar Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2014(10) SCC 301 in our considered view may not be of any assistance as it was a case where reference was adjudicated by the labour court/Industrial Tribunal and the award was passed in favour of the workman on merits whereas in the instant case the dispute was not referred to the labour court on account of alleged lapse of 23 years.
We have heard counsel for the appellant and do not find any error being committed by the ld. Single Judge while passing the order impugned which may call for our interference.
Consequently, the special appeal is accordingly dismissed.
[Prakash Gupta], J. [Ajay Rastogi], J. dsr-
"All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed"
Datar Singh P.S.