Madhya Pradesh High Court
Commissioner Land Record & … vs Bharat Bhushan Vyas on 7 July, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
1 WPS-3007-2004
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL
ON THE 7 th OF JULY, 2026
WRIT PET. (SERVICE) No. 3007 of 2004
COMMISSIONER LAND RECORD & SETTLEMENT&A
Versus
BHARAT BHUSHAN VYAS
Appearance:
Shri Yogesh Dhande - Advocate for petitioner.
Non appeared for respondent.
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 6825 of 2025
BHARAT BHUSHAN VYAS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
ORDER
This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
has been preferred by the petitioners assailing the award dated 26.06.2003
passed by the Labour Court No.1, Bhopal, in Case No.17/96 (I.D.
Reference), whereby the Labour Court has directed reinstatement of the
respondent, Bharat Bhushan, with consequential benefits including back
wages.
2. The facts, in brief, are that the respondent, Bharat Bhushan, was
engaged as a daily-wage employee in the office of the Commissioner, Land
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
2 WPS-3007-2004
Records, Bhopal. It is borne out from the record that the respondent worked
in the said office from 05.05.1992 to 15.03.1993, and that thereafter he
himself left the work. There is no order of appointment on record, nor is
there any order of removal or termination passed against the respondent; in
the absence thereof, it cannot be disbelieved that the respondent left the job
of his own volition. Nearly four years after leaving the work, the respondent,
in the year 1996, raised an industrial dispute by filing an application under
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ‘the Act of 1947’)
before the Labour Court, Bhopal, which came to be registered as Case
No.17/96, claiming regularisation of his service on the ground that his
services had been retrenched without notice and that he had worked for more
than 240 days. The petitioners specifically objected before the Labour Court
that the respondent was a daily-wager engaged for seasonal work, that he had
left the job of his own accord upon completion of the work, and that, in any
event, the office of the Commissioner, Land Records, does not answer the
description of an ‘industry’, and the Act of 1947 has no application to the
case. Despite the aforesaid objections, the Labour Court, vide the impugned
award, held in favour of the respondent and directed his reinstatement with
consequential benefits, including back wages. Feeling aggrieved, the
petitioners are before this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the office of the
Commissioner, Land Records, Bhopal, being concerned with the
maintenance of land records and conduct of survey operations, is engaged in
the discharge of the sovereign and regal functions of the State relating to
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
3 WPS-3007-2004
land revenue administration, and does not answer the description of
‘industry’ as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act of 1947. It is further
submitted that the respondent, not having been employed in an ‘industry’
within the meaning of the Act of 1947, does not answer the description of a
‘workman’ under Section 2(s) thereof, and consequently, the dispute raised
by him could not, in law, be said to be an ‘industrial dispute’ as defined
under Section 2(k) of the Act of 1947. On this ground alone, it is submitted
that the Labour Court lacked the very jurisdiction to entertain the reference
under Section 10 of the Act of 1947, and the impugned award, having been
rendered without jurisdiction, is a nullity in the eyes of law. It is next
submitted that there is no order of appointment or of removal/termination on
record, and that the unrebutted material on record establishes that the
respondent left the job of his own volition upon completion of the seasonal
work for which he was engaged; in the circumstances, the question of
retrenchment, or of compliance with Section 25-F of the Act of 1947, does
not arise at all. Learned counsel further submits that the claim itself was
highly belated, the respondent having approached the Labour Court in the
year 1996, nearly four years after he had left the job in the year 1992-93,
without any explanation for the delay. It is also submitted that no scheme for
regularisation of daily-wage employees was in existence either at the time the
respondent left the job or at the time he raised the dispute; the scheme of
2003 contained no provision for regularisation, and the subsequent One-
Time Regularisation Scheme of 2016, which required fifteen years of
continuous service as a condition precedent, was not only inapplicable to the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
4 WPS-3007-2004
respondent’s case on facts but has since itself been withdrawn. On a
cumulative consideration of the aforesaid, it is submitted that the impugned
award is unsustainable both for want of jurisdiction and on merits, and
deserves to be quashed in exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction of this
Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with
their able assistance.
5. Before adverting to the rival contentions, it would be apposite to
notice the relevant statutory provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,
having a bearing on the present controversy.
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Section 2(a) ‘appropriate Government’ means:-
(i) in relation to any industrial dispute concerning any industry carried
on by or under the authority of the Central Government, or by a railway
company, or concerning any such controlled industry as may be specified in
this behalf by the Central Government, or in relation to an industrial dispute
concerning a Dock Labour Board established under Section 5-A of the Dock
Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948, or the Industrial Finance
Corporation of India Limited formed and registered under the Companies
Act, 1956, or the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation established under
Section 3 of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948, or the Board of
Trustees constituted under Section 3-A of the Coal Mines Provident Fund
and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948, or the Central Board of Trustees
and the State Boards of Trustees constituted under Sections 5-A and 5-BSignature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:504245 WPS-3007-2004
respectively of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions
Act, 1952, or the Life Insurance Corporation of India established under
Section 3 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956, or the Oil and Natural
Gas Corporation Limited registered under the Companies Act, 1956, or the
Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation established under
Section 3 of the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act,
1961, or the Central Warehousing Corporation established under Section 3
of the Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962, or the Unit Trust of India
established under Section 3 of the Unit Trust of India Act, 1963, or the Food
Corporation of India established under Section 3, or a Board of Management
established for two or more contiguous States under Section 16 of the Food
Corporations Act, 1964, or the Airports Authority of India constituted under
Section 3 of the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994, or a Regional Rural
Bank established under Section 3 of the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976, or
the Export Credit and Guarantee Corporation Limited, or the Industrial
Reconstruction Bank of India, or the National Housing Bank established
under Section 3 of the National Housing Bank Act, 1987, or an air transport
service, or a banking or an insurance company, a mine, an oilfield, a
Cantonment Board, or a major port, any company in which not less than
fifty-one per cent of the paid-up share capital is held by the Central
Government, or any corporation, not being a corporation referred to in this
clause, established by or under any law made by Parliament, or the Central
public sector undertaking, subsidiary companies set up by the principal
undertaking and autonomous bodies owned or controlled by the CentralSignature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:504246 WPS-3007-2004
Government, the Central Government; and
(ii) in relation to any other industrial dispute, including the State public
sector undertaking, subsidiary companies set up by the principal undertaking
and autonomous bodies owned or controlled by the State Government, the
State Government:
Provided that in case of a dispute between a contractor and the
contract labour employed through the contractor in any industrial
establishment where such dispute first arose, the appropriate Government
shall be the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may
be, which has control over such industrial establishment;
Section 2(aaa) ‘average pay’ means the average of the wages payable to a
workman– (i) in the case of a monthly paid workman, in the three complete
calendar months, (ii) in the case of a weekly paid workman, in the four
complete weeks, (iii) in the case of a daily paid workman, in the twelve full
working days, preceding the date on which the average pay becomes
payable, if the workman had worked for three complete calendar months or
four complete weeks or twelve full working days, as the case may be, and
where such calculation cannot be made, the average pay shall be calculated
as the average of the wages payable to a workman during the period he
actually worked;
Section 2(g) ’employer’ means (i) in relation to an industry carried on
by or under the authority of any department of the Central Government or a
State Government, the authority prescribed in this behalf, or where no
authority is prescribed, the head of the department; (ii) in relation to anSignature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:504247 WPS-3007-2004
industry carried on by or on behalf of a local authority, the chief executive
officer of that authority;
Section 2(gg) ‘executive’, in relation to a trade union, means the body,
by whatever name called, to which the management of the affairs of the trade
union is entrusted;
Section 2(i) a person shall be deemed to be ‘independent’ for the
purpose of his appointment as the Chairman or other member of a Board,
Court or Tribunal, if he is unconnected with the industrial dispute referred to
such Board, Court or Tribunal or with any industry directly affected by such
dispute: Provided that no person shall cease to be independent by reason
only of the fact that he is a shareholder of an incorporated company which is
connected with, or likely to be affected by, such industrial dispute; but in
such a case, he shall disclose to the appropriate Government the nature and
extent of the shares held by him in such company;
Section 2(j) ‘industry’ means any business, trade, undertaking,
manufacture or calling of employers and includes any calling, service,
employment, handicraft, or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen;
Section 2(k) ‘industrial dispute’ means any dispute or difference
between employers and employers, or between employers and workmen, or
between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment
or non-employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of
labour, of any person;
Section 2(n) ‘public utility service’ means (i) any railway service or
any transport service for the carriage of passengers or goods by air; (ia) any
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
8 WPS-3007-2004
service in, or in connection with the working of, any major port or dock or
any industrial establishment or unit engaged in essential defence services; (ii)
any section of an industrial establishment, on the working of which the
safety of the establishment or the workmen employed therein depends; (iii)
any postal, telegraph or telephone service; (iv) any industry which supplies
power, light or water to the public; (v) any system of public conservancy or
sanitation; (vi) any industry specified in the First Schedule which the
appropriate Government may, if satisfied that public emergency or public
interest so requires, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be a
public utility service for the purposes of this Act, for such period as may be
specified in the notification: Provided that the period so specified shall not,
in the first instance, exceed six months but may, by a like notification, be
extended from time to time, by any period not exceeding six months at any
one time, if in the opinion of the appropriate Government public emergency
or public interest requires such extension;
Section 2(s) ‘workman’ means any person (including an apprentice)
employed in any industry to do any manual, unskilled, skilled, technical,
operational, clerical or supervisory work for hire or reward, whether the
terms of employment be express or implied, and for the purposes of any
proceeding under this Act in relation to an industrial dispute, includes any
such person who has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched in connection
with, or as a consequence of, that dispute, or whose dismissal, discharge or
retrenchment has led to that dispute, but does not include any such person (i)
who is subject to the Air Force Act, 1950, or the Army Act, 1950, or the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
9 WPS-3007-2004
Navy Act, 1957; or (ii) who is employed in the police service or as an officer
or other employee of a prison; or (iii) who is employed mainly in a
managerial or administrative capacity; or (iv) who, being employed in a
supervisory capacity, draws wages exceeding ten thousand rupees per
mensem or exercises, either by the nature of the duties attached to the office
or by reason of the powers vested in him, functions mainly of a managerial
nature.
Section 3. Works Committee. (1) In the case of any industrial
establishment in which one hundred or more workmen are employed or have
been employed on any day in the preceding twelve months, the appropriate
Government may, by general or special order, require the employer to
constitute in the prescribed manner a Works Committee consisting of
representatives of employers and workmen engaged in the establishment, so
however that the number of representatives of workmen on the Committee
shall not be less than the number of representatives of the employer. The
representatives of the workmen shall be chosen in the prescribed manner
from among the workmen engaged in the establishment and in consultation
with their trade union, if any, registered under the Indian Trade Unions Act,
1926.
(2) It shall be the duty of the Works Committee to promote measures
for securing and preserving amity and good relations between the employer
and workmen and, to that end, to comment upon matters of their common
interest or concern and endeavour to compose any material difference of
opinion in respect of such matters.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
10 WPS-3007-2004
Section 10. Reference of disputes to Boards, Courts or Tribunals. (1)
Where the appropriate Government is of the opinion that any industrial
dispute exists or is apprehended, it may at any time, by order in writing (a)
refer the dispute to a Board for promoting a settlement thereof; or (b) refer
any matter appearing to be connected with or relevant to the dispute to a
Court for inquiry; or (c) refer the dispute or any matter appearing to be
connected with, or relevant to, the dispute, if it relates to any matter specified
in the Second Schedule, to a Labour Court for adjudication; or (d) refer the
dispute or any matter appearing to be connected with, or relevant to, the
dispute, whether it relates to any matter specified in the Second Schedule or
the Third Schedule, to a Tribunal for adjudication: Provided that where the
dispute relates to any matter specified in the Third Schedule and is not likely
to affect more than one hundred workmen, the appropriate Government may,
if it so thinks fit, make the reference to a Labour Court under clause (c):
Provided further that where the dispute relates to a public utility service and a
notice under Section 22 has been given, the appropriate Government shall,
unless it considers that the notice has been frivolously or vexatiously given
or that it would be inexpedient so to do, make a reference under this sub-
section notwithstanding that any other proceedings under this Act in respect
of the dispute may have commenced: Provided also that where the dispute is
one in relation to which the Central Government is the appropriate
Government, it shall be competent for that Government to refer the dispute
to a Labour Court or an Industrial Tribunal, as the case may be, constituted
by the State Government.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
11 WPS-3007-2004
(1-A) Where the Central Government is of the opinion that any
industrial dispute exists or is apprehended and the dispute involves any
question of national importance or is of such a nature that industrial
establishments situated in more than one State are likely to be interested in,
or affected by, such dispute, and that the dispute should be adjudicated by a
National Tribunal, then the Central Government may, whether or not it is the
appropriate Government in relation to that dispute, at any time, by order in
writing, refer the dispute or any matter appearing to be connected with, or
relevant to, the dispute, whether it relates to any matter specified in the
Second Schedule or the Third Schedule, to a National Tribunal for
adjudication.
(2) Where the parties to an industrial dispute apply in the prescribed
manner, whether jointly or separately, for a reference of the dispute to a
Board, Court, Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, the appropriate
Government, if satisfied that the persons applying represent the majority of
each party, shall make the reference accordingly.
(2-A) An order referring an industrial dispute to a Labour Court,
Tribunal or National Tribunal under this section shall specify the period
within which such Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal shall submit
its award on such dispute to the appropriate Government: Provided that
where such industrial dispute is connected with an individual workman, no
such period shall exceed three months: Provided further that where the
parties to an industrial dispute apply in the prescribed manner, whether
jointly or separately, to the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal for
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
12 WPS-3007-2004
extension of such period or for any other reason, and the presiding officer of
such Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal considers it necessary or
expedient to extend such period, he may, for reasons to be recorded in
writing, extend such period by such further period as he may think fit:
Provided also that in computing any period specified in this sub-section, the
period, if any, for which the proceedings before the Labour Court, Tribunal
or National Tribunal had been stayed by any injunction or order of a Civil
Court shall be excluded: Provided also that no proceedings before a Labour
Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal shall lapse merely on the ground that
any period specified under this sub-section had expired without such
proceedings being completed.
(3) Where an industrial dispute has been referred to a Board, Labour
Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal under this section, the appropriate
Government may, by order, prohibit the continuance of any strike or lock-out
in connection with such dispute which may be in existence on the date of the
reference.
(4) Where, in an order referring an industrial dispute to a Labour
Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal under this section or in a subsequentorder, the appropriate Government has specified the points of dispute for
adjudication, the Labour Court or the Tribunal or the National Tribunal, as
the case may be, shall confine its adjudication to those points and matters
incidental thereto.
(5) Where a dispute concerning any establishment or establishments
has been, or is to be, referred to a Labour Court, Tribunal or NationalSignature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
13 WPS-3007-2004
Tribunal under this section, and the appropriate Government is of the
opinion, whether on an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise, that
the dispute is of such a nature that any other establishment, group or class of
establishments of a similar nature is likely to be interested in, or affected by,
such dispute, the appropriate Government may, at the time of making the
reference or at any time thereafter but before the submission of the award,
include in that reference such establishment, group or class of
establishments, whether or not, at the time of such inclusion, any dispute
exists or is apprehended in that establishment, group or class of
establishments.
(6) Where any reference has been made under sub-section (1-A) to a
National Tribunal, then, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no
Labour Court or Tribunal shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon any
matter which is under adjudication before the National Tribunal, and
accordingly (a) if the matter under adjudication before the National Tribunal
is pending in a proceeding before a Labour Court or Tribunal, the proceeding
before the Labour Court or the Tribunal, as the case may be, in so far as it
relates to such matter, shall be deemed to have been quashed on such
reference to the National Tribunal; and (b) it shall not be lawful for the
appropriate Government to refer the matter under adjudication before the
National Tribunal to any Labour Court or Tribunal for adjudication during
the pendency of the proceeding in relation to such matter before the National
Tribunal. Explanation.–In this sub-section, ‘Labour Court’ or ‘Tribunal’
includes any Court or Tribunal or other authority constituted under any law
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
14 WPS-3007-2004
relating to investigation and settlement of industrial disputes in force in any
State.
(7) Where any industrial dispute, in relation to which the Central
Government is not the appropriate Government, is referred to a National
Tribunal, then, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any reference
in Sections 15, 17, 19, 33-A, 33-B and 36-A to the appropriate Government
in relation to such dispute shall be construed as a reference to the Central
Government but, save as aforesaid and as otherwise expressly provided in
this Act, any reference in any other provision of this Act to the appropriate
Government in relation to that dispute shall mean a reference to the State
Government.
(8) No proceedings before a Labour Court, Tribunal or National
Tribunal in relation to an industrial dispute shall lapse merely by reason of
the death of any of the parties to the dispute being a workman, and such
Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal shall complete such
proceedings and submit its award to the appropriate Government.
Section 25-B. Definition of continuous service.For the purposes of this
Chapter (1) a workman shall be said to be in continuous service for a period
if he is, for that period, in uninterrupted service, including service which may
be interrupted on account of sickness or authorised leave or an accident or a
strike which is not illegal, or a lock-out or a cessation of work which is not
due to any fault on the part of the workman;
(2) where a workman is not in continuous service within the meaning of
clause (1) for a period of one year or six months, he shall be deemed to be in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
15 WPS-3007-2004
continuous service under an employer (a) for a period of one year, if the
workman, during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the date with
reference to which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the
employer for not less than (i) one hundred and ninety days, in the case of a
workman employed below ground in a mine; and (ii) two hundred and forty
days, in any other case; (b) for a period of six months, if the workman,
during a period of six calendar months preceding the date with reference to
which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the employer for
not less than (i) ninety-five days, in the case of a workman employed below
ground in a mine; and (ii) one hundred and twenty days, in any other case.
Explanation. For the purposes of clause (2), the number of days on
which a workman has actually worked under an employer shall include the
days on which (i) he has been laid-off under an agreement or as permitted by
standing orders made under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders)
Act, 1946, or under this Act or under any other law applicable to the
industrial establishment; (ii) he has been on leave with full wages, earned in
the previous year; (iii) he has been absent due to temporary disablement
caused by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment; and
(iv) in the case of a female, she has been on maternity leave; so, however,
that the total period of such maternity leave does not exceed twelve weeks.
6. A conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions shows that while
the definition of ‘industry’ under Section 2(j) of the Act of 1947 is cast in
wide terms, it is well settled, as explained by the Supreme Court in
Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa, (1978) 2 SCC
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
16 WPS-3007-2004
213, that functions of the State which are sovereign or regal in character
stand outside the sweep of the said definition, notwithstanding the width of
its language. The office of the Commissioner, Land Records, in the discharge
of its functions relating to survey operations and the maintenance of land
records, is engaged in the exercise of the sovereign and regal functions of the
State pertaining to land revenue administration, and does not, therefore,
answer the description of ‘industry’ within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the
Act of 1947. It follows that the respondent, though engaged to perform
manual work as a daily-wager, was not a person ’employed in any industry’
within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act of 1947, and does not,
therefore, answer the description of a ‘workman’ thereunder. In the absence
of an ‘industry’ and of a ‘workman’, the dispute raised by the respondent
regarding the cessation of his engagement cannot be said to be an ‘industrial
dispute’ within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Act of 1947. The Labour
Court, consequently, lacked the very jurisdiction to entertain the reference
registered as Case No.17/96 and to adjudicate upon it under Section 10 of
the Act of 1947, and the impugned award, having been rendered in the
absence of such jurisdiction, cannot be sustained in law.
7. It may also be noticed that in a line of decisions, namely, BSNL v.
Bhurumal, (2014) 7 SCC 177, State of Uttarakhand v. Sureshwati, (2021) 3
SCC 108, and Bhavnagar Municipal Corpn. v. Jadeja Govubha Chhanubha,
(2014) 16 SCC 130, the Supreme Court has held that reinstatement ought
ordinarily to be the rule rather than the exception in cases of illegal
retrenchment, and that the burden of proving 240 days of continuous service
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
17 WPS-3007-2004
within the meaning of Section 25-B of the Act of 1947 lies squarely upon the
workman concerned. These principles, however well settled, presuppose the
applicability of the Act of 1947 to the establishment in question and the
claimant answering the description of a ‘workman’ thereunder in the first
place. Since, for the reasons recorded above, the Act of 1947 itself has no
application to the case of the respondent, the aforesaid principles can be of
no assistance to him in the facts of the present case.
8. That apart, even otherwise, on facts, there is no order of
appointment or of removal on record, and the unrebutted material establishes
that the respondent left the job of his own accord upon completion of the
seasonal work in the year 1993, in the circumstances, the cessation of his
engagement cannot be equated with retrenchment so as to attract the
requirement of notice or compensation under Section 25-F of the Act of
1947. The claim itself was raised nearly four years after the respondent had
left the job, without any explanation for the delay, and the plea for
regularisation is equally unsustainable, inasmuch as no scheme providing for
regularisation of daily-wage employees was in existence either when the
respondent left the job or when he raised the dispute in the year 1996, the
subsequent One-Time Regularisation Scheme of 2016, apart from having no
application to the respondent’s case on facts, itself stood withdrawn thereafter
and cannot, therefore, enure to his benefit.
9. For the foregoing reasons, the finding recorded by the Labour
Court treating the office of the Commissioner, Land Records, as an
‘industry’, and the respondent as a ‘workman’ entitled to raise an industrial
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:50424
18 WPS-3007-2004
dispute under Section 10 of the Act of 1947, is unsustainable in law, the
reference culminating in the impugned award being incompetent for want of
jurisdiction, and equally unsustainable on merits for the reasons aforestated.
The impugned award dated 26.06.2003 passed by the Labour Court No.1,
Bhopal, in Case No.17/96 (I.D. Reference), is accordingly set aside, and the
writ petition is allowed. The application/reference filed by the respondent,
Bharat Bhushan, registered as Case No.17/96, stands dismissed. No order as
to costs.
WRIT PETITION No. 6825 of 2025
Since the award dated 26.06.2003 passed by the Labour Court No.1,
Bhopal, in Case No.17/96 has been set aside. Thus, Writ Petition No.6825 of
2025 is dismissed.
(PRADEEP MITTAL)
JUDGE
Praveen
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time:
7/10/2026 5:42:52 PM
