Purba Medinipur Zela Security Service and Allied v. Union of India & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SUVRA GHOSH
Provisions considered
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 s. 12(4)
Judgment
Mr. Raj Kumar Gaurisaria Ms. Hema Mukerjee …for the respondents no. 1 & 2 It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that in the reference made under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with regard to the industrial dispute between the management of M/s Eagledeep Kolaghat OMT Project Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Dinesh Chandra Agarwal Infrastructure Ltd. Service Provider Project Implementation Unit, NHAI Campus over termination of services of some employees, the names of three employees were deleted by the authority without issuance of notice to the petitioners. The petitioners pray for inclusion of the names of the said employees in the order of reference dated April 09, 2018. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India candidly submits that such deletion may have been due to a mistake on the part of the authority. He further submits that a representation be submitted by the petitioners in this regard which may be considered by them. In view of the submission made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties, this Court is of the view that the writ petition be treated as a representation by the respondents no. 1 and 2 and be considered and disposed of within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this order after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing petitioners, in accordance with law. With the above observations and directions this writ petition being WPA No. 14836 of 2021 is disposed of. There shall be, however, no order as to costs. Since no affidavit invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to be admitted. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities. (Suvra Ghosh,J)
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.