Calcutta High Court
Kelvin Jute Company Ltd. Worker'S ... vs Krishna Kumar Agarwal & Ors on 4 December, 2018
Author: Arindam Sinha
Bench: Arindam Sinha
ORDER SHEET
GA NO.3152 OF 2018
WITH
RVWO NO.38 OF 2018
WP NO.4312 OF 1993
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
KELVIN JUTE COMPANY LTD. WORKER'S PROVIDENT FUND
Versus
KRISHNA KUMAR AGARWAL & ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
Date : 4th December, 2018.
MR.SAKTI NATH MUKHERJI, SR.ADVOCATE, MR.SHYAMAL SARKAR, SR.ADVOCATE, MR.S.K.KASERA, ADVOCATE FOR
PETITIONER
MR.S.C.PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR PROVIDENT FUND AUTHORITY
MR.ARUNAVA GHOSH,SR.ADVOCATE FOR WORKMEN
MR.SURAJIT NATH MITRA, SR.ADVOCATE, MR.DEEPAK KR.JAIN, MR.KUMAR GUPT, ADVOCATE FOR TREND VYAPAAR
LTD.
MR.SOUMYA MAJUMDAR, MR.PRADIP KR.SARAWAGI, ADVOCATES FOR RESPONDENT NO.1
MR.PRATAP CHATTERJEE,SR.ADVOCATE, MR.SAMIT TALUKDAR, SR.ADVOCATE, MR.DEBOJYOTI DATTA, MS.AKRITI JAIN, ADVOCATES FOR RESPONDENT NO.14 MR.UTPAL MAJUMDAR, MR.PUSHAN KAR, MS.ADREEKA PANDEY, ADVOCATES FOR PROFORMA RESPONDENT NO.2 The Court : Review application and memorandum has been filed by respondent no.1 in the writ petition. Mr. Mukherji, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of review applicant. Mr. Chatterjee, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of respondent no.14 in the writ petition 2 and takes preliminary objection regarding maintainability of review before writ court. He submits, judgment of writ court was confirmed in Intra- Court appeal. This review application must be moved before appeal court since judgment of writ court merged in judgment of appeal court.
Mr.Mukherji draws attention to order dated 25th October, 2018 passed in proceedings of Civil Appeal no.2591 of 2006 (The Kelvin Jute Co. Ltd. Workers Provident Fund & Anr. Vs. Krishna Kumar Agarwala & Ors.), in particular paragraphs 12 to 15. He points out judgment of writ court was carried in Intra-Court Appeal, from whose judgment there was further appeal, on special leave granted, to Supreme Court. Supreme Court by judgment dated 21st January, 2016 affirmed judgment of Division Bench. Yet said court, when approached for review by his client, said application for recall/modification which has effect of reviewing original judgment in the writ petition cannot be entertained by it. Hence, he wants to move this review application in this Court.
Submissions on law applicable will be heard on adjourned date. List on 18th December, 2018.
(ARINDAM SINHA, J.) sb.