RAHUL YOGESHCHANDRA DALALversusM/S STYROLUTION(ABS) INDIA LTD

     C/SCA/15873/2024                               JUDGMENT DATED: 03/03/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15873 of 2024


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
================================================================

             Approved for Reporting                Yes          No

================================================================
                       RAHUL YOGESHCHANDRA DALAL
                                  Versus
                   M/S STYROLUTION(ABS) INDIA LTD & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
AAKASH D MODI(7449) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
================================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
       PRACHCHHAK

                               Date : 03/03/2026

                                 JUDGMENT


1.       Present petition is   led by the petitioner - employee under
Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter be referred to as “the
Act”) challenging the order dated 06.07.2023 passed by the learned
Judge, Labour Court, Vadodara (hereinafter be referred to as “the
Labour Court”) in Reference (LCV) No. 167 of 2014 below Exh.-17
whereby, the learned Judge has held and declared that the
departmental inquiry initiated by the present respondent is legal and
proper and in compliance of the principles of natural justice.


2.       At the outset, learned counsel Mr. Varun K. Patel has submitted



                                   Page 1 of 4
     C/SCA/15873/2024                            JUDGMENT DATED: 03/03/2026




that the writ petition is not maintainable as the preliminary issue
which is decided by the Labour Court with regard to determining the
legality and validity of the departmental proceedings can always be
challenged after nal award is passed. In support of his submissions,
learned counsel Mr. Patel has referred to and relied upon the
judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Cooper
Engineering Limited vs. P.P. Mundhe, AIR 1975 SC 1900 and
the judgment dated 04.08.2004 passed in Special Civil Application
No. 8754 of 2003 with allied matters by the Coordinate Bench of this
Court.


3.       Learned counsel Mr. Aakash Modi, appearing for the petitioner
has submitted that in fact, the Labour Court has passed the impugned
order without appreciating the legal aspect. He has submitted that in
fact, the departmental proceedings can be held to be illegal, since the
petitioner was not paid the subsistence allowance and such allowance
has been set o= against the loan given by the respondent. It is further
submitted that the departmental proceedings in fact, were not held
legally without appreciating the documentary evidences. Finally, it is
submitted by the learned counsel Mr. Modi, that the Labour Court may
be directed to decide the reference as expeditiously as possible, since
the reference is of the year 2014.


4.       I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective
parties and perused the material placed on record.


5.       In the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the
order dated 06.07.2023 passed by the Labour Court, Vadodara, below
Exh.17 declaring such departmental proceedings as valid and legal
and in compliance with the principles of natural justice.


                                 Page 2 of 4
     C/SCA/15873/2024                                     JUDGMENT DATED: 03/03/2026




6.       At this stage, it would be apposite to incorporate the
observations made in the case of Cooper Engineering (supra) :-

         “22. We are, therefore, clearly of opinion that when a case of dismissal or
         discharge of an employee is referred for industrial adjudication the labour
         court should rst decide as a preliminary issue whether the domestic
         enquiry has violated the principles of natural justice. When there is no
         domestic enquiry or defective enquiry is admitted by the employer, there
         will be no di"culty. But when the matter is in controversy between the
         parties that question must be decided as a preliminary issue. On that
         decision being pronounced it will be for the management to decide whether
         it will adduce any evidence before the labour court. If it chooses not to
         adduce any evidence, it will not be thereafter permissible in any proceeding
         to raise the issue. We should also make it clear that there will be no
         justi cation for any party to stall the nal adjudication of the dispute by the
         labour court by questioning its decision with regard to the preliminary issue
         when the matter, if worthy, can be agitated even after the nal award. It
         will be also legitimate for the High Court to refuse to intervene at this
         stage. We are making these observations in our anxiety that there is no
         undue delay in industrial adjudication.”


         Thus, the Hon’ble Apex Court has clari ed that the preliminary
issue with regard to questioning the domestic inquiry can also be
agitated even after the nal award and it will be also legitimate for
the High Court to refuse to intervene at this stage so that there may
not be any delay in industrial adjudication.


7.       In the judgment dated 04.08.2004 passed in Special Civil
Application No.8754 of 2003, the Coordinate Bench of this Court on a
similar issue, after considering the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in the case of Cooper Engineering (supra), has observed thus:-

         “9. From the above decisions and in particular from the decision of the
         Hon'ble Supreme Court in Cooper Engineering (supra), one thing is clear
         that whenever the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal decides the
         validity of the departmental inquiry conducted by the employer at the
         interlocutory stage, writ petition challenging the said order would not be
         maintainable. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Cooper Engineering (supra)
         observed that there will be no justi cation for any party to stall the nal


                                       Page 3 of 4
        C/SCA/15873/2024                                                      JUDGMENT DATED: 03/03/2026




            adjudication of the dispute by the Labour Court by questioning its decision
            which is at a preliminary issue and the same can be agitated even after the
              nal award. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had also observed that it will be
            legitimate for the High Court to refuse to intervene at that stage. The
            Hon'ble Supreme Court had also observed that the above observations are
            made to ensure that there is no undue delay in industrial adjudication.”



8.          Thus, it is well established proposition of law that whenever the
Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal decides the validity of the
departmental inquiry conducted by the employer at an interlocutory
stage, a writ petition challenging the said order would not be
maintainable.


9.          In view of above, the present petition is disposed of with a
clari cation that it will be open for the petitioner to challenge the
legality, validity and ndings of domestic inquiry after the nal award
is passed before the appropriate forum by                                               ling appropriate
proceedings, in case the award is passed against him. However, since
the reference is of the year 2014, the Labour Court shall decide the
same, preferably within a period of eight months from the date of
receipt of writ of this order. Notice is discharged. There shall be no
order as to costs.



                                                                   (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)

Dolly




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: DOLLYBEN CHETANBHAI VADUKAR(HC01392), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 03/03/2026 17:15:10

                                                    Page 4 of 4