MAHENDRA SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA) DATE OF ORDER & Ors.

HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J. Mr. Shiv Kumar for Mr. B.K. Vyas for the petitioner. This petition for writ is preferred to assail validity of the decision of the appropriate government not to refer the industrial dispute for its adjudication being belated. The petitioner, who was employed with National Research Centre on Equine Jod-Beed Enquine Production Campus, NRCE, Bikaner on daily rate basis in the month of September 1989, stood terminated from service on 13.12.1995. An industrial dispute in the year 2007 i.e. after a lapse of about 11 years was raised by the petitioner. The appropriate government refused to refer the dispute being belated, hence, this petition for writ is preferred. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, no limitation is prescribed for raising an industrial dispute and, 2 therefore, the appropriate government erred while refusing to make reference of the dispute. I do not find any substance in the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. It is well settled that the appropriate government under Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is required to examine each and every dispute on its own merits. The appropriate government is not supposed to examine the issues those require judicious adjudication, but the appropriate government on being satisfied that no explanation is given for causing delay in raising the dispute can very well refuse to make reference. In the instant matter, no reason of whatsoever nature is given by the petitioner for raising a dispute after a lapse of 11 years and, therefore, I do not find any wrong with the decision of the appropriate government. Accordingly, this petition for writ is dismissed. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. Anil/