PRATAP SINGH vs INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :- 27.01.2026. Date of Decision :- 27 .03.2026. + LPA 8/2021 PRATAP SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Nitin Jain & Mr. Madhav Aggarwal, Advocates. versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. V.N. Koura with Ms. Paramjeet Benipal, Advocates for Respondent No.1/IOCL. Mr. Rajesh Gogna and Ms. Rebina Rai, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA JUDGMENT DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, C.J. 1. This intra-court appeal seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 30.01.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby W.P.(C) 7645/2016 instituted by Indian Oil Corporation Limited – respondent no.1, herein challenging the order dated 10.05.2016 of the Ministry of Labour, Government of India referring the industrial dispute under Section 10(1) read with Section 10(2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1945 (hereinafter referred to as the ID Act), has been allowed and the said order dated Signature Not Verified Digiltally Signed LPA 8/2021 Page 1 of 12 By:SREERAM L Signing Date:27.03.2026 14:25:19 10.05.2016 has been quashed. 2. The learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition and quashing the order of reference dated 10.05.2016 has observed in the impugned judgment and order that in view of the earlier award dated 15.09.1989 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as CGIT) in respect of the contractual workers of Mathura Refinery, a Unit of respondent no.1, no industrial dispute existed and, therefore, the order dated 10.05.2016 of the Central Government making reference in relation to the industrial dispute was bad in law. 3. Learned Single Judge in the impugne