{"id":21369,"date":"2001-10-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-10-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001"},"modified":"2016-11-10T11:01:39","modified_gmt":"2016-11-10T05:31:39","slug":"rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001","title":{"rendered":"Rail India Technical And Economic &#8230; vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor &#8230; on 9 October, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rail India Technical And Economic &#8230; vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor &#8230; on 9 October, 2001<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 2002 IIAD Delhi 319, 97 (2002) DLT 521, 2002 (94) FLR 211<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Sikri<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: A Sikri<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>  A.K. Sikri, J.  <\/p>\n<p> 1. The plaintif is a Government company<br \/>\nincorporated under the provisions of Indian Companies<br \/>\nAct, 1956. Its corporate office is at New Delhi House,<br \/>\n27, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi and one of its division<br \/>\nat Arunachal Bhawan, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. It<br \/>\nhas filed this suit for permanent injunction against<br \/>\nthe defendants. The defendant No. 1 is a trade union<br \/>\nand defendants 2 to 7 are the members of the defendant<br \/>\nNo. 1 trade union. The suit is for decree of passing<br \/>\npermanent injunction restraining the defendants from<br \/>\nsquatting\/dharna in its corporate office. The events<br \/>\nleading  to the filing of the present suit, as disclosed<br \/>\nin the plaint, run as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>  It is stated that for providing better working<br \/>\nconditions and facilities to its employees and in order<br \/>\nto save time, in the year 1998, the plaintiff invited<br \/>\noffers for running a small canteen for providing<br \/>\ntea\/coffee and snacks to its employees working in the<br \/>\nsaid offices. Out of the offers received in the<br \/>\ndefendant No. 3, the offer of one M\/s Friends and Family<br \/>\nCaterers was found to be more competitive. On 29th<br \/>\nJanuary, 1998 M\/s Friends &amp; Family Caterers were<br \/>\nawarded the contract for supply of tea\/coffee and<br \/>\nsnacks to employees of the plaintiff at its said<br \/>\noffices. It is relevant to point out that prior to<br \/>\n1998, the employees were given tea allowance by the<br \/>\nplaintiff and the employees either used to order tea<br \/>\nfrom outside or go out of the premises and have tea.<br \/>\nThis resulted in lot of wastage of precious time and<br \/>\nfurther exposing the confidential files etc. to the<br \/>\noutsiders. It is also stated that the said contract<br \/>\nwas awarded to M\/s Friends &amp; Family Caterers for a<br \/>\nperiod of one year commencing w.e.f. 1st February,<br \/>\n1998 to 31st January, 1999. The said contractor<br \/>\nbrought his own employees for running the said canteen<br \/>\nfor the said period. The said employees of M\/s Friends<br \/>\n&amp; Family Caterers are the defendants 2 to 7. It is<br \/>\nstated that the defendants 2 to 7 are not the employees<br \/>\nof the plaintiff and there is relationship of<br \/>\nemployer-employee between the plaintiff and the<br \/>\ndefendants 2 to 7.\n<\/p>\n<p> 2. The aforesaid contract awarded to M\/s Friends<br \/>\n&amp; Family Caterers came to an end on 31st January, 1999<br \/>\nbut was mutually extended up to 31st May, 1999 to enable<br \/>\nthe plaintiff to find other suitable contractor. On<br \/>\nthe expiry of the aforesaid period, M\/s Friends &amp;<br \/>\nFamily Caterers removed all their goods and other<br \/>\nmaterials lying in the premises. Further contract was<br \/>\nawarded to one Sh. B.S. Duggal on 1st June, 1999 who took<br \/>\ncharge of the canteen and started its operations w.e.f.<br \/>\n1st July, 1999 and brought his own staff. However, the<br \/>\ndefendants 2 to 7 filed writ petition being CW<br \/>\nNo. 3802\/99 which is being contested by the plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n<p> 3. The plaintiff further avers that in order to<br \/>\npressurise the plaintiff to accede to their demands,<br \/>\nthe defendants stated squatting in the premises of the<br \/>\nplaintiff, in the corridor in front of room No. 214, New<br \/>\nDelhi House, 27, Brakhamba Road, New Delhi. The Said<br \/>\ndefendants threatened the employees of the plaintiff<br \/>\nand of new contractor and cause obstruction in the<br \/>\nsmooth functioning of the canteen. The defendants are<br \/>\ntaking the law in their own hands and do not allow any<br \/>\nperson to enter the said canteen and any employee of<br \/>\nthe contractor to serve the employees of the plaintiff.<br \/>\nWith the fear of injury and in law and order problem<br \/>\narising, the plaintiff number of times reported the<br \/>\nmatter to the local police with whose intervention,<br \/>\nsupply is restored and once the police personnel leave<br \/>\nthe premises the said threats and obstruction again<br \/>\nstart.\n<\/p>\n<p> 4. It is further stated that the corridors<br \/>\nleading to the offices of the plaintiff are 9&#8242; ft.<br \/>\nwide and the defendants and their other supporters<br \/>\nsquatting the said corridor leave no space for<br \/>\nemployees of the plaintiff. The act and conduct of the<br \/>\ndefendants is causing obstruction in the smooth<br \/>\nfunctioning of the plaintiff apart from causing<br \/>\ninconvenience to all the employees. It is also stated<br \/>\nthat apart from the flats under the occupation of the<br \/>\nplaintiff, their other flats and the owners and<br \/>\noccupants of the same are also put to inconvenience.<br \/>\nThe defendants 2 to 7 have no privity of contract with<br \/>\nthe plaintiff. The defendants by using said illegal<br \/>\ntactics cannot circumvent the process of law and force<br \/>\nthe plaintiff to accede to their illegal demands. The<br \/>\npresent suit is therefore filed for permanent<br \/>\ninjunction as mentioned above.\n<\/p>\n<p> 5. Along with the suit, the plaintiff had filed<br \/>\napplication under order XXXIX Rule 1 &amp; 2 CPC for<br \/>\nad-interim injunction in which ex-parte order dated<br \/>\n14th September, 1999 was passed restraining the<br \/>\ndefendants, their agents, members, representatives etc.<br \/>\nfrom affecting the ingress and egress of the officers<br \/>\nor any visitors of the plaintiff company. It was<br \/>\nhowever made clear that this order did not prevent the<br \/>\ndefendants from carrying on a peaceful demonstration in<br \/>\nsupport of their demands.\n<\/p>\n<p> 6. The defendants were served with summons and<br \/>\nthey caused appearance on 15th November, 1999 and took<br \/>\ntime to file the written statement. The written<br \/>\nstatement was not filed. Further time was granted by<br \/>\norder dated 7th February, 2000. Still the written<br \/>\nstatement was not filed nor anybody appeared for the<br \/>\ndefendants and by order dated 4th August, 2000 last<br \/>\nopportunity of six weeks was granted for this purpose.<br \/>\nOn the next date i.e. 1st December, 2000 also nobody<br \/>\nappeared on behalf of the defendants nor any written<br \/>\nstatement was filed. The defendants were accordingly<br \/>\nproceeded against ex-parte and the plaintiff was<br \/>\npermitted to file the evidence by way of affidavit.\n<\/p>\n<p> 7. Affidavit of Sh. P.T. Mittal, Company Secretary<br \/>\nof the plaintiff has been filed who has also proved<br \/>\ndocuments Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-11. The incorporation of the<br \/>\nplaintiff company is proved by certificate of<br \/>\nincorporation (Ex. P-1) is the GPA dated 8th<br \/>\nJune, 1995 authorising him to sign and verify the<br \/>\npleadings and institute the suit. The contract with<br \/>\nM\/s Friends &amp; Family Caterers is Ex. P-3. Letters<br \/>\nextending the contract till 31st May, 1999 are Ex. P-4<br \/>\nto Ex. P-7. Documents evidencing the fresh contract<br \/>\nawarded to Sh. B.S. Duggal are Ex. P-8 to Ex. P-10 and<br \/>\ncomplaint lodged with the police station alleging<br \/>\nillegal activities of the defendants is Ex. P-11. He<br \/>\nhas also deposed about the agitation by the defendants<br \/>\nat the plaintiff&#8217;s premises and averments made in the<br \/>\nplaint to this effect are reiterated on oath. It is<br \/>\nalso stated that the corridors leading to the offices<br \/>\nof the plaintiff are 9&#8242; ft. wide and the defendants<br \/>\nand their other supporters squatting the said corridor<br \/>\nleave no space for employees of the plaintiff. The act<br \/>\nand conduct of the defendants is causing obstruction in<br \/>\nthe smooth functioning of the plaintiff apart from<br \/>\ncausing inconvenience to all the employees. It is also<br \/>\nstated that apart from the flats under the occupation<br \/>\nof the plaintiff, their other flats and the owners and<br \/>\noccupants of the same are also put to inconvenience.<br \/>\nThe defendants 2 to 7 have no privity of contract with<br \/>\nthe plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n<p> 8. The aforesaid case of the plaintiff remains<br \/>\nunrebutted and unchallenged. There is no opposition on<br \/>\nbehalf of the defendants as they have chosen to remain<br \/>\nabsent and have also not controverter any allegations<br \/>\nmentioned in the plaint by not filing the written<br \/>\nstatement. Of course, the defendants have right to<br \/>\nagitate their demands by peaceful methods. But they<br \/>\nhave no right to interfere with the smooth functioning<br \/>\nof the plaintiff or to prevent ingress of egress of the<br \/>\nemployees of the plaintiff and from enjoying the<br \/>\nfacilities in their office. To ensure this, the<br \/>\ndefendants cannot be permitted to squat in the<br \/>\ncorridors of the building leading to the office of the<br \/>\nplaintiff. They have already filed the writ petition<br \/>\nbeing CW No. 3802\/99 and their rights, if any, would be<br \/>\ndetermined in the aforesaid writ petition. The<br \/>\ndefendants cannot take law into their hands by adopting<br \/>\nsuch disruptive activities.\n<\/p>\n<p> 9. In these circumstances, decree for permanent<br \/>\ninjunction is hereby restraining the defendants, their<br \/>\nmembers, agents, representatives etc. from causing any<br \/>\nobstruction in the ingress or egress of the employees<br \/>\nof the plaintiff and of the contractor from the said<br \/>\nbuilding. The defendants, their members, agents,<br \/>\nrepresentatives etc. are also restrained from<br \/>\nsquatting\/dharna inside the premises, corridors or<br \/>\ngates of New Delhi House, 27, Barakhamba Road, New<br \/>\nDelhi.\n<\/p>\n<p> 10. There shall be no order as to costs. Decree<br \/>\nbe drawn accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p> 11. Suit and IA stand disposed of.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court Rail India Technical And Economic &#8230; vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor &#8230; on 9 October, 2001 Equivalent citations: 2002 IIAD Delhi 319, 97 (2002) DLT 521, 2002 (94) FLR 211 Author: A Sikri Bench: A Sikri JUDGMENT A.K. Sikri, J. 1. The plaintif is a Government company incorporated under the provisions of Indian [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-21369","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Rail India Technical And Economic ... vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor ... on 9 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rail India Technical And Economic ... vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor ... on 9 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2001-10-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-10T05:31:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rail India Technical And Economic &#8230; vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor &#8230; on 9 October, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-10-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-10T05:31:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001\"},\"wordCount\":1443,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001\",\"name\":\"Rail India Technical And Economic ... vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor ... on 9 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-10-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-10T05:31:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rail India Technical And Economic &#8230; vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor &#8230; on 9 October, 2001\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Rail India Technical And Economic ... vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor ... on 9 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rail India Technical And Economic ... vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor ... on 9 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-10-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-10T05:31:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rail India Technical And Economic &#8230; vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor &#8230; on 9 October, 2001","datePublished":"2001-10-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-10T05:31:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001"},"wordCount":1443,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001","name":"Rail India Technical And Economic ... vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor ... on 9 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-10-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-10T05:31:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rail-india-technical-and-economic-vs-bhartiya-general-mazdoor-on-9-october-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rail India Technical And Economic &#8230; vs Bhartiya General Mazdoor &#8230; on 9 October, 2001"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21369","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21369"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21369\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21369"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21369"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21369"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}