1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI Writ Petition(MD)No.1653 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1,2 and 3 of 2011 The National Horticultural Research Development Foundation, 27/52, First Floor, Chinthamani Pudur, Trichy Road, Coimbatore. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.P.Murugesan 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Labour, (Conciliation), Nehruji Nagar, Dindigul. 3.The Labour Court, District Court Buildings, Trichy. ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to conciliation failure report issued by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.Aa1/4609/2010 dated 28.11.2010 and the notice of proceedings in I.D.No.100/2010 before the Labour Court, Trichy and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.V.O.S.Kalaiselvam For Respondents : Mr.V.Pandi, Government Advocate ORDER The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the conciliation efforts taken by the second respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Labour and consequently, issuance of notice by the Labour Court, Trichy in I.D.No.100/2010 on the ground that neither the Conciliation Officer nor the Labour Court has jurisdiction to entertain the industrial dispute. 2.It is stated that the first respondent who was originally appointed in Trichy was terminated and thereafter, he was appointed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 afresh in Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, from there, he was transferred to Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh and subsequently, dismissed from service at Nasik. It was in respect of that dismissal, he has raised the conciliation considered by the third respondent after the failure of the conciliation, the first respondent has filed ID.No.100 of 2010 on the file of the Labour Court, Trichy under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act. 3.The main point on which the writ petition is laid is that the Court has no jurisdiction since no cause of action has arisen anywhere either before the second respondent or the third respondent. It is also stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has raised a preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the industrial dispute before the Labour Court. If that is the case, it is for the Labour Court to decide as to whether the industrial dispute is maintainable or not. Certainly filing of the writ petition against the conciliation proceedings as well as the numbering of the industrial dispute before the Labour Court cannot be entertained by this Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4.Accordingly, giving liberty to the petitioner to raise maintainability before the Labour Court, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Assistant Commissioner of Labour(Conciliation), Nehruji Nagar, Dindigul. 2.The Labour Court, District Court Buildings, Trichy. +1cc to Mr.V.O.S.Kalaiselvam, Advocate, Sr.No. 27971 +1cc to the Special Govt.Pleader, Sr.No. 27914 sms ssk/29.08.2011 /5c -2p/- Writ Petition(MD)No.1653 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1,2 and 3 of 2011 16.08.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/