Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Basant Singh Vs. State of H.P and Ors

Basant Singh vs State of H.P and Ors

Type Court Judgment Court Supreme Court of India Decided Sep 26, 2016
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/77130

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Supreme Court of India
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Labour and Industrial

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Labour and Industrial

Key legal issue
Labour and Industrial

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Basant Singh

Respondent

State of H.P and Ors

Excerpt

non-reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal no.9714 of2016(arising out of slp (c) no.13744 of 2014) basant singh appellant versus state of h.p. & ors respondents with civil appeal no.9715 of2016(arising out of slp (c) no.13748 of 2014) with civil appeal no.9716 of2016(arising out of slp (c) no.13752 of 2014) with civil appeal nos.9717-9718 of2016(arising out of slp (c) no.11720-11721 of 2015) judgmentkurian, j.1 leave granted. 2 the appellants are aggrieved since they have been allegedly discriminated in the matter of reference of their disputes to the labour court for adjudication. according to the appellants, in the cases of similarly situated persons, without any objection with regard to the delay, the government has referred their cases for adjudication. some of the cases are pointed out in the additional reference filed in i.a. no.3/2015. one is order dated 1.10.2014 and there are references to awards dated 14.11.2013 and 12.4.2014. 3 in view of the above, the appeals are disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 that in case disputes in the case of similarly situated persons have been referred for adjudication before the labour court, the cases of the appellants shall also be considered for reference, ignoring the objection in the matter of delay.4. needful be done within two months from the production of a copy of this judgments. no costs. ..................j.[kurian joseph]. ....................j.[rohinton fali nariman]. new delhi; september26 2016

Full Judgment

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.9714 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.13744 of 2014) BASANT SINGH APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF H.P. & ORS RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.9715 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.13748 of 2014) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.9716 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.13752 of 2014) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS.9717-9718 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.11720-11721 of 2015)

JUDGMENT

KURIAN, J.

1 Leave granted. 2 The appellants are aggrieved since they have been allegedly discriminated in the matter of reference of their disputes to the Labour Court for adjudication. According to the appellants, in the cases of similarly situated persons, without any objection with regard to the delay, the Government has referred their cases for adjudication. Some of the cases are pointed out in the additional reference filed in I.A. No.3/2015. One is order dated 1.10.2014 and there are references to Awards dated 14.11.2013 and 12.4.2014. 3 In view of the above, the appeals are disposed of with a direction to Respondent No.1 that in case disputes in the case of similarly situated persons have been referred for adjudication before the Labour Court, the cases of the appellants shall also be considered for reference, ignoring the objection in the matter of delay.

4. Needful be done within two months from the production of a copy of this judgments. No costs. ..................J.

[KURIAN JOSEPH]. ....................J.

[ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]. NEW DELHI; SEPTEMBER26 2016

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial