Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Jharkhand High Court

Atique Khan vs Employers In Relation To The Management ... on 18 August, 2017

Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh

Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh

                            
                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                             C. M. P. No. 50 of 2017
                              Atique Khan                                             ..... Petitioner
                                                           vs.­
                              Employers in relation to the management of 
                              Jamadoba Colliery of M/s. Tata Steel Limited, Dhanbad......Opposite Party 
                                                           ­­­­­
                            CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
                                         ­­­
                            For the Petitioner                        : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, Adv.
                            For the Opposite party                    : M/s. Indrajit Sinha and G.M.Mishra, Advs.
                                                ­­­

          3/18.8

.2017 Heard   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner   and   opposite   party  represented   by   Mr.   Indrajit   Sinha   as   learned   counsel   on   record   Mr.  G. M. Mishra has gone out of station for his eye treatment. 

Petitioner seeks restoration of W.P.(L) No. 4005 of 2014, which  was   dismissed   for   non­compliance   of   the   peremptory   order   dated  18th January, 2017 on failure to remove the surviving defects. 

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the certified copy  of the impugned order could not be filed within peremptory time as it  was   made   available   to   the   petitioner   by   learned   Industrial   Tribunal  No.   1,   Dhanbad   only   on   24th  January,   2017.   In   these   circumstances,  petitioner would suffer irreparably if the writ petition is not restored  though there is no deliberate fault on his part. 

Learned counsel representing the opposite party does not object  to the said prayer. 

Having regard to the submissions made and the reasons stated in  the   instant   petition,   let   W.P.(L)   No.   4005   of   2014   be   restored   to   its  original file. 

Accordingly, the instant petition stands disposed of. 

(Aparesh Kumar Singh,J) jk