Labour Court's Orders Can't Be Executed Via Writ Before High Court, Workman Must Approach Labour Court First: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court single bench of Justice Pankaj Purohit held that High Courts are not executing courts for the purposes of giving effect to the reliefs granted by the Labour Courts. Matters of implementation and execution fall within the domain of Labour Courts only, in line with Order 21 of the CPC, 1908. Brief Facts: The Petitioner (“Workman”) was employed as a daily wage worker with the Respondent department (“Management”) since 2007. However, his services were abruptly terminated by the Management on 21.10.2016. Subsequently, the matter was escalated to the State Government for consideration as an industrial dispute, leading to the initiation of a case before the Labour Court in Haldwani. The Labour Court issued an order in favour of the Workman. However, in order to execute that award, the Workman filed a writ petition in the Uttarakhand High Court (“High Court”) through a mandamus, directing the Management to facilitate his reinstatement. Observations by the High Court: The High Court noted that rather than resorting to the Labour Court for the execution of the awarded relief, the Workman directly approached the High Court through the writ petition. However, the High Court emphasized that the appropriate avenue for executing the award lies within the purview of the Labour Court. The High Court referred to Section 11(9) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which stipulates that every award issued by a Labour Court is subject to execution in accordance with the procedural framework outlined for the execution of orders and decrees of a civil court under Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The High Court held that its role cannot be transmuted into that of an Executing Court for the implementation of awards issued by the Labour Court. Such awards, akin to decrees for execution purposes, fall squarely within the domain of the Labour Court's jurisdiction. Consequently, all writ petitions were summarily dismissed. Case Title: Naveen Ram vs State of Uttarakhand & others and Connected Matters. Case Number: Writ Petition (S/S) No.662 of 2024 and Connected Matters.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Utt) 6 Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Harendra Belwal Advocate for the Respondent: Mr Rajeev Singh Bisht along with Mr Atul Bahuguna, Mr Narayan Dutt and Mr Bhupendra Singh Koranga Click Here To Read/Download Order

Labour Court's Orders Can't Be Executed Via Writ Before High Court, Workman Must Approach Labour Court First: Uttarakhand High Court

Rajesh Kumar

Tags