Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

W.P.(C) No.12853 of 2014 Ganeswar Panda Aged about 49 years Son of Rajendra Panda At: Ratagada, P.O.: Godisahi Mundali Colony District: Cuttack. ... Petitioner.

-VERSUS-

1. Orissa Infrastructure Development Corporation Represented through its Managing Director Janapatha, Bhubaneswar, District: Khordha.

2. State of Odisha Represented through its Secretary Industries Department, Secretariat Building Bhubaneswar, District: Khordha.

3. Management of the Executive Engineer M/s. Orissa Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (IDCO) Bhubaneswar Construction Division No.II IDCO Tower, Janapatha Bhubaneswar. ... Opposite parties.

W.P.(C) No.14423 of 2014 W.P.(C) Nos.12853 of 2014 & 14423 of 2014 Page 1 of 61

M/s. Odisha Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Represented through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director IDCO Tower, Janpath Bhubaneswar. ... Petitioner (First party-- Management in the Industrial Tribunal).

2.5. The Industrial Tribunal, Bhubaneswar formulated following three issues for adjudication in connection with the aforesaid reference being registered as Industrial Dispute Case No.52 of 2012:

i. Whether the reference is maintainable?
W.P.(C) Nos.12853 of 2014 & 14423 of 2014 Page 6 of 61
ii. Whether the action of the management of M/s.
Odisha Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (IDCO), Bhubaneswar Construction Division No-II, Bhubaneswar in refusing employment to Sri Ganeswar Panda, DLR-Typist, with effect from 01.10.2000 is legal and/or justified?
'whether the action of the Management of M/s. Odisha Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (IDCO), Bhubaneswar in refusing employment to Sri Ganeswar Panda, DLR-Typist with effect from 01.10.2000 is legal and/or justified?
If not, what relief Sri Panda is entitled to?"
W.P.(C) Nos.12853 of 2014 & 14423 of 2014 Page 23 of 61

10. The said Tribunal has dealt with the issue of delay in such reference being made vide Issue No.(i).

10.1. Having placed heavy reliance on the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Reserve Bank of India Vrs. Gopinath Sharma, (2006) 6 SCC 221, Sri Surya Prasad Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for M/s. IDCO submitted that stale claim could not have been entertained by the Industrial Tribunal, Bhubaneswar as the workman moved the District Labour Officer in the year 2007 even though he was disengaged since 2000. He referred to paragraph 20 of the said reported decision, which is reproduced herein below: