Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The General Manager, Bharat Heavy ... vs Canteen Workers Of Bhel on 25 January, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Maheshwari, Sudhanshu Dhulia
1
ITEM NO.22 COURT NO.6 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 6196/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-02-2021
in RA No. 196/2015 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At
Madras)
THE GENERAL MANAGER,
BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
CANTEEN WORKERS OF BHEL & ANR. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 54353/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 53811/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.
66572/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/
FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 53810/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 60128/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES AND IA No. 54534/2021 -
PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 25-01-2023 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG
Mr. Saurav Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR
Ms. Kavya, Adv.
Ms. Abhivyakti Banerjee, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. K.M. Ramesh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anurag Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Meenesh Kumar Dubey, Adv.
Ms. Anjali Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. S. R. Setia, AOR
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AAG
Digitally signed by
Neetu Khajuria
Date: 2023.01.28
13:36:27 IST
Reason: Mr. D.kumanan, AOR
Ms. Deepa S., Adv.
Mr. Sheikh Fakhruddin Kalia, Adv.
Ms. Rachheta Chawla, Adv.
2
Ms. Divya Singh, aDv.
Mr. Devyam Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Tanvi Annad, Adv.
Ms. Manikka S. Priya, Adv.
Ms. Bano Deswal, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Though a preliminary objection is sought to be raised by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent(s) as regards maintainability of this petition against the order passed by the High Court rejecting a review petition but, irrespective of such preliminary objection, we have primarily examined the matter to find if there be any reason for us to consider interference in this matter after this length of time, particularly against an order passed by the High Court refusing review application that was filed in the year 2015 on the ground of discovery of the new evidence after dismissal of the petition for special leave to appeal by this Court on 20.04.2015.
Taking the totality of the facts and circumstances into account, so far as the present matter is concerned, we do not feel inclined to grant special leave to appeal and, therefore, deem it appropriate to close the proceedings herein.
However, in the totality of circumstances, 3 we also deem it appropriate and hence observe that the observations occurring and the findings recorded in the present matter shall remain confined only in relation to the workers represented by respondent No.1 and not otherwise. In other words, any other pending matter shall be considered and examined on its own merits.
Subject to the observations foregoing, exercise of jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India in this matter is declined. The petition is dismissed as such.
Pending applications also stand disposed of. (NEETU KHAJURIA) (RANJANA SHAILEY) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER