# PFIZER LIMITED THROUGH CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY MR SAMIR KAZI vs GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, DELHI & ORS.

Court: Delhi High Court
Date: 2025-07-10
Citation: W.P.(C)-924/2022 2025:DHC:5546
Petitioner: PFIZER LIMITED THROUGH CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY MR SAMIR KAZI
Respondent: GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, DELHI & ORS.

[Official PDF on Delhi High Court website](https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/59010072025CW9242022_123822.pdf)

## Judgment text (excerpt)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 10.07.2025 W.P.(C) 924/2022 & CM APPL. 2666/2022 PFIZER LIMITED THROUGH CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY MR SAMIR KAZI .....Petitioner Through: Mr Ajit Makhijani, Mr Gaurav Bahl, and Mr Amit Yadav, Advocates. versus GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rishikesh Kumar, ASC, GNCTD with Ms. Sheenu Priya, Mr. Atik Gill and Mr. Sudhir Kumar Shukla, Advocates for R-1 & 2. Mr. Satyendra Mishra and Mr. Ahmad Khan, Advocates for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. The present Petition seeks to challenge the order of reference dated 04.03.2021 [hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Order”] passed by the Respondent No.2, referring a dispute to the learned Labour Court for adjudication. An additional prayer is also being made by the Petitioner seeking directions to quash all proceedings emanating from the Impugned Order. 2. The grievance of the Petitioner is in a narrow compass. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Respondent No.2 has not 3. Briefly the facts are that a complaint was filed by the Respondent No.3 on 20.1

https://niyam.ai/judgements/high-court/2025/july/pfizer-limited-through-constituted-attorney-mr-samir-kazi-vs-government-of-national-capital-territory-delhi-ors