High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 10 UK CK 1851

Shivam Autotech Limited vs Labour Commissioner & Ors.

Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital · Decided on 15 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pankaj Purohit, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition Misc. Single No.3212 of 2026, Writ Petition Misc. Single No.3220 of 2026 and Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 3222 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 406 words

Since common question of law and facts are involved in these writ petitions, hence they are being taken up and being decided together.

2.

Petitioner(s) are aggrieved by the order passed by Assistant Labour Commissioner-cum-Cess Assessor and Cess Collector, under Section 5 of the Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) whereby, petitioner(s)-Construction Company is directed to pay the penalty and labour cess.

3.

Feeling aggrieved by the said order, petitioner has approached the Appellate Authority i.e. Labour Commissioner, Uttarakhand, under Section 11 of the Act by filing different Appeals in aforesaid writ petitions. A prayer has been made by petitioner(s) for staying the operation and effect of the orders impugned passed by learned Assistant Labour Commissioner in these Appeals.

4.

It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner(s) that due to non-availability of the Presiding Officer i.e. Assistant Labour Commissioner-cum-Cess Assessor and Cess Collector in the office, prayer for interim relief/stay is still pending, causing hardship to petitioner(s), as the amount assessed in the impugned orders under Section 5 of the Act, would be recovered by respondents with penalty, despite filing the Appeal(s). Thus, petitioner(s) approached this Court seeking a direction to Appellate Authority i.e. Labour Commissioner, Uttarakhand, to consider and grant the prayer for interim relief/stay to petitioner(s) within stipulated time as prescribed by this Court.

5.

Learned counsel for petitioner(s) submits that if such a direction is issued to Appellate Authority i.e. Labour Commissioner, Uttarakhand, the grievance of petitioner(s) would be redressed.

6.

This fact is not disputed by learned counsel for State and counsel for Uttarakhand Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Board.

7.

Having considered the facts of the cases as put forward in the writ petitions and having gone through the impugned order, this Court is of the view that since the Appeals are pending disposal, a direction can be issued to Appellate Authority i.e. Labour Commissioner, Uttarakhand, to consider and decide the interim relief prayer of petitioner(s) in the Appeals expeditiously.

8.

Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of. Appellate Authority i.e. Labour Commissioner, Uttarakhand, is directed to consider and decide the interim relief prayer of petitioner(s) made in appeal(s) expeditiously within a period not later than seven days from today.

9.

Pending application(s), in all writ petitions, stands disposed of.

10.

Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to learned counsel for parties today itself, as per Rules.