High CourtsSingle Bench(1994) 07 KAR CK 0016

Sumithra K. vs State of Karnataka and Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 15 July 1994 · Citation: (1995) 70 FLR 743 : (1994) 3 KarLJ 132 : (1995) 1 LLJ 242

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kumar Rajaratnam, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 39381 of 1992

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

8 paragraphs · 231 words

Kumara Rajarathnam, J.—This writ petition is taken up for final disposal with the consent of both the parties.

2.

The short point on which this writ petition can be disposed of is whether the Government can reject the request for reference on the ground that the 2nd respondent would not come within the jurisdiction of the Industrial Disputes Act.

3.

The Government has gone to the extent of holding that the 2nd respondent is not an industry within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is well-settled law that it is not open to the government to hold as to whether the 2nd respondent is an industry or not and it is entirely within the jurisdiction of the Labour Court.

4.

In these circumstances, there will be a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to consider afresh the case of the petitioner and to dispose of the application in the light the observations made by me.

5.

The first respondent will dispose of the application for reference within a period of four weeks from the date of the order being communicated to the first respondent.

6.

There will be no orders as to costs.

7.

This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

8.

All the contentions raised by the 2nd respondent and the 3rd respondent are permitted to be raised by them in the event of reference being made.