CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Krishna Kumar Pandey vs Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C. and Others

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 12 August 2002 · Citation: (2002) 4 AWC 2887 : (2002) 95 FLR 181

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rakesh Tiwari, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 4K
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
C.M.W.P. No. 4485 of 1992
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 211 words

Rakesh Tiwari, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the Parties and perused the records.

2.

Admittedly, the petitioner is a workman and the dispute in this case regarding suspension cannot be decided without going into findings of fact. This matter can only be adjudicated after taking oral as well as documentary evidence, which can only be done by the labour court.

3.

The petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy to raise the dispute before the labour court as has been held in Chandrama Singh v. Managing Director, U. P. Cooperative Union Lucknow and Ors. 1991 (2) AWC 1005 : 1991 UPLBEC 898.

4.

In view of the facts stated above, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Conciliation Officer to refer the dispute within one month under U. P. Industrial Disputes Act to the labour court. The labour court will fix a date for R.D.I, within six weeks from the date of receipt of reference. Thereafter the case will proceed on day to day basis under Rule 12 (7) of the U. P. Industrial Dispute Rules, 1957 and shall be decided expeditiously within a period of three months from the date of receipt of reference.

5.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally.