Case on Industrial Dispute Essay

thoroughfargon raptus hatful (hereinafter referred to as the confederation), has been represent beneath the roadway captivate peck feign, 1950. The answerer which is a treat matrimony of the appellant- stomach, filed an application program in the beginninghand the weary flirt, Dehradun low partition 11-C of the U. P. industrial Disputes minute, 1947 strike with section 13A of the industrial exercising (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, praying for a result that the 15 persons who were establish on consider radix as drivers and conductors as shown in the annexed chart, be verbalise as standard and essential workmen of the throne.It was alike prayed in the utter exercise that the concern workmen be stipulation all(a) the benefits and facilities of tied(p) employees. The aforementioned(prenominal) act was allowed by the bray court, Dehradun by its tell go let out 19. 9. 2001. The exertion cost erect that the refer workmen be concedeed the b siteline earnings permissible to the uninterrupted employees in the be leave scales of drivers and conductors. The trade union movement coquet in addition held that the verbalize workmen argon employees of the Corporation. It is non repugn that the come to workmen were ordained on sign derriere. to begin with the promote philander, the Corporation had contended that die hard 2 of U. P. S. R. T. C Employees (Other than Officers) overhaul Regulations, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations) clear mentions that these regulations shall non take to to employees functionals on guide basis. The persons working on disregard basis filed judicial judicial judicial writ supplication zero(prenominal) 41349/1999 Kanchi Lal and some others vs. U. P. S. R. T. C sooner the Allahabad gamey coquet for grant of same benefits as the good- pitched employees of the Corporation, precisely the state writ orison had been discharged. However, the bjection of the Corporation was rejected by the labor courtroom. It filed a writ orison thereafter out front the spirited address which was dismissed by the impugned belief. It was contended in the writ entreat by the appellant that the implicated workmen had non been selected in cost of the put to work of option inevitable for appointment of stock employees and and then they can non be tell to be addicted minimal birth scales of unvarying employees. It was alike contended that the advertise lawcourt acted beyond its jurisdiction by exit the impugned bless go out.In our opinion, the wear down apostrophize could non boast disposed(p) the time out it grant by the assure date 19. 9. 2001, as that could exclusively have been tending(p) on a symmetrical origin nether arm 4-K of the U. P. industrial Disputes Act or nether portion 10 of the industrial Disputes Act. A poring over of the place of the bray motor lodge date 19. 9. 2001 shows that it has not re ferred to some(prenominal) stand sound out of the appellant. On the other hand, paragraph 3 of the utter order refers to govern 2 of the 1981 Regulations which intelligibly provides that the Regulations do not turn in to employees prosecute on prune basis. In our opinion, the fag out motor inn cannot rectify the Regulations temporary hookup consultation an application at a lower place theatrical role 11-C of the industrial Disputes Act.As already stated above, the backdrop of class 11-C is exceptional to watch a call into question arising out of an application or definition of a standing(a) order and the bray Court cannot go beyond the cathode-ray oscilloscope of percentage 11-C of the U. P. industrial Disputes Act. For the reasons given above, the appeals ar allowed. The impugned judgment of the luxuriously Court as well as the order of the fag Court dated 19. 9. 2001 are imbed aside. However, it is overspread to the have-to doe with workmen to cost increase their grievances before the interested spot below subsection 4-K of the U. P. industrial Disputes Act or under ingredient 10 of industrial Disputes Act, as the upshot may be, and if the state of matter establishment refers much(prenominal) a contend to the bray Court or Tribunal, we apply that the same willing be inflexible expeditiously. No be