Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S AZAMGARH DUGDHA UTPADAK SANGH versus LABOUR COURT, VARANASI AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S Azamgarh Dugdha Utpadak Sangh v. Labour Court, Varanasi and others - WRIT - C No. 16779 of 1985 [2004] RD-AH 534 (13 August 2004)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.51

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.16779 of 1985

M/s Azamgarh Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Vs. The Labour

Court, Varanasi and others.

***

Hon'ble V.C. Misra, J.

Heard Sri G.D. Misra learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned standing counsel on behalf of respondent no.1. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.

The facts of the case in brief, are that the petitioner employed the respondent no.2 as a Driver of milk-van maintained by the petitioner for the purpose of supply and collection of the milk, on daily wages basis. Subsequently, the milk-van was shifted to Gorakhpur Unit, and the work-man-respondent no.2 was asked to join at Gorakhpur. Since respondent no.2 declined to join, his services were terminated. A dispute was raised before the respondent no.1 for adjudication on reference made by the State Government. The petitioner received a notice-dated 17.4.1985 for filing the written statement on 29.5.1985. The case was adjourned to 19.6.1985. On 19.6.1985, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner before the Labour Court and an ex parte order was passed, copy of which has been annexed as annexure-2 to the writ petition. An application-dated 31.8.1985 was moved on behalf of the petitioner for recalling the ex parte order, copy of which is filed as annexure-3 to the writ petition. After hearing both the sides, the Labour Court vide its order-dated 30.9.1985 rejected the restoration application moved by the petitioner, a copy of which has been filed as annexure-4.

The petitioner being aggrieved by the above said orders dated 19.6.1985 and 31.8.1985 passed by the respondent no.1, filed the present writ petition. Meanwhile, on 30.9.1985 the award was also finally passed the respondent no.1 in favour of respondent no.2. This fact was not brought to the notice of this Court at the time when this writ petition was filed and an interim stay order dated 13.1.1986 was passed by this Court staying further proceedings before the Labour Court-respondent no.1 in Adjudication Case No.102 of 1985. The petitioner moved an amendment application dated 16.10.1986 seeking amendment in the writ petition challenging the ex parte award dated 30.9.1985 notified on 28.11.1985 published on 24.10.1985 under Section 6 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act and also stated therein that the petitioner had no notice or knowledge of the said ex parte award and only came to know about the same as stated in the said application. This amendment application was rejected vide order dated 9.2.1988 by this Court. The petitioner filed another Writ Petition No.9683 of 1988 challenging the ex part award in May 1988.

I have looked into the record of the case and heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length. In my view, this writ petition has become infructuous due to the fact that the final award has already been passed by the respondent no.1 and the same has been challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.9683 of 1988 and the impugned orders challenged in the present writ petition already stand merged in the final award, no relief much less substantive relief can now be granted in this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not raised and pressed any other ground. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.

August 13, 2004

Hasnain


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.