MIRC Electronics Limited v. Mr. R.D. Bhat
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
order, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. With this limited modification in the impugned order, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ( A.A. SAYED, J.)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 983 OF 2012 MIRC Electronics Limited. .... Petitioners. vs. shok Padhye & Ors. .... Respondents. Mr. S. S. Pakale a/w Pratik Salgaonkar for the Petitioners. Mr. R.D. Bhat for Respondents. CORAM : A.A. SAYED, J. DATE : 16 JULY 2012. P.C. Considering the controversy involved in the petition, I am not inclined to exercise writ jurisdiction under Dmt 2 wp983-12 Article 226 of the Constitution of India to entertain this writ petition. It is, however, clarified that the Affidavit in Examination-in-Chief shall be filed by all the workmen and the said workmen in so far as the issue of back-wages is concerned, shall make themselves available for cross- examination.
Operative part
With this limited modification in the impugned order, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
( A.A. SAYED, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: order, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 16 Jul 2012. The bench was A A SAYED.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.