← Library
Patna High CourtL.P.A/1655/2013dismissed

Lalan Giri v. The Union Of India And ORS

2017-03-09Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1655 of 2013 IN C. REV. 481 of 2012 =========================================================== Lalan Giri, son of Sri Narpati Puri, resident of Chandpur Belia, P.O. & P.S. - Jakkanpur, District - Patna .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Ministry of Labour, New Delhi

2. The Desk Officer, Ministry of Labour, Govt. of India, New Delhi

3. The Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Patna

4. The Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Mauryalok Complex, Patna

5. The Management of the State Bank of India through its Chairman, S.B.I. Administrative Building, Madam Kama Road, Mumbai

6. The Chief General Manager, S.B.I., Local Head Office, J.C. Road, Patna

7. The Branch Manager, S.B.I. Main Branch, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate Ms. Sandhya Kumari Sinha, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. CGC Mr. Ravinder Kumar Sharma, CGC =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI And HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 09-03-2017 Delay of 16 days is condoned. I.A. No. 9089 of 2013 is allowed.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the Union of India.

The learned Single Judge has refused to exercise his power of review keeping in mind that no error apparent on the face of record had emerged which was required to be reviewed and

Patna High Court LPA No.1655 of 2013 dt.09-03-2017 2/2 corrected. The learned Single Judge has also taken note of the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that if such prayer was allowed, it would amount to re-hearing and re-deciding the writ application itself which was not the scope of a review. None of the grounds stated therein are erroneous in law. The appeal is dismissed being devoid of merit. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) S.Pandey/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 10.03.2017 Transmission Date