{"id":236038,"date":"2020-09-21T12:54:07","date_gmt":"2020-09-21T07:24:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=236038"},"modified":"2020-10-02T13:40:16","modified_gmt":"2020-10-02T08:10:16","slug":"del-hc-if-a-petition-involving-industrial-dispute-has-no-exceptional-circumstances-but-does-have-statutory-remedy-available-can-it-still-be-entertained-by-court-hc-discusses-scs-principles","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/21\/del-hc-if-a-petition-involving-industrial-dispute-has-no-exceptional-circumstances-but-does-have-statutory-remedy-available-can-it-still-be-entertained-by-court-hc-discusses-scs-principles\/","title":{"rendered":"Del HC | If a petition involving industrial dispute has no ‘exceptional circumstances ‘ but does have statutory remedy available, can it still be entertained by Court? HC discusses SC’s principles"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>J.R. Midha, J., while addressing the present petition observed the principle laid down by the Supreme Court of India with regard to Industrial Disputes.<\/p>\n

Challenge in the Present petition<\/span><\/p>\n

Trade Union of PTI Employees and Federation of four PTI Employees’ Unions have challenged the retrenchment of 297 employees by the Press Trust of India.<\/p>\n

Permanent and regular workmen have been retrenched while contractual workers have been retained. The principle of ‘last come first go’\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>has not been followed.<\/p>\n

Reasons why retrenchment is violative of certain provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act<\/span><\/p>\n

Further, it has been stated that retrenchment is violative of Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act as PTI employs more than 100 employees and has not taken the prior permission from the State Government before retrenchment; <\/span><\/p>\n

retrenchment is violative of Section 25-N of Industrial Disputes Act as three months notice\/three months wages in lieu of notice has not been given; <\/span><\/p>\n

retrenchment is violative of Sections 25-F and 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act as one month notice indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the retrenchment compensation has not been given; <\/span><\/p>\n

retrenchment is violative of Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act read with Clauses 10 and 11 of the Fourth Schedule as the service conditions of the employees relating to rationalization\/technique were altered without notice; <\/span><\/p>\n

the retrenchment is violative of Section 16A of the Working Journalists Act, 1955 as the reason for retrenchment was the liability for payment of wages and mandating promotional grades as per Clause 18(f) of Majithia Award; <\/span><\/p>\n

the retrenchment is violative of Section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act as there is the substantial short payment of retrenchment compensation to the employees;<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

closure of Attendees, Transmission and Engineering<\/em> departments is violative of Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act as the closure was without permission and the retrenchment is illegal and mala fide to sabotage the continued disbursement of Majithia Award benefits and to discourage the employees to pursue their remedies under the Wage Board.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

retrenchment constitutes an unfair trade practice as set out in clauses 5(a), (b) and (d) of the Fifth Schedule of the Industrial Disputes Act;<\/p>\n

large number of employees have not yet received individual notice of their retrenchment; and the plea of \u201cNo work\u201d<\/em> of PTI is false and contrary to PTI work registers.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision<\/span><\/h4>\n

Whether the writ petitions should be entertained in view of the statutory remedy available to the retrenched employees under the Industrial Disputes Act?<\/span><\/p>\n

Bench while deciding the present matter observed that,<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

The law is well settled by the Supreme Court that a writ petition should not be entertained in respect of industrial disputes for which a statutory remedy is available under the Industrial Disputes Act unless \u2018Exceptional circumstances\u2019 are made out.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n
\n
\n

Writ jurisdiction is a discretionary jurisdiction and the discretion should not ordinarily be exercised if there is an alternative remedy available to the petitioner.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

Sum and Substance:<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n