Dharam Dutt Verma v. India Offset Printers Pvt Ltd.

$~43 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 615/2016 DHARAM DUTT VERMA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. R. K. Kaushik, Advocate.

Versus

INDIA OFFSET PRINTERS PVT LTD.

..... Respondent Through:

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

O R D E R

% 30.09.2016 CM No. 36047/2016 Since the respondent herein has been proceeded against ex parte, before the Labour Court, hence, there is no need for issuance of notice in the present application.

By this application, the applicant/petitioner submits that he cannot deposit the costs of Rs.10,000/-, which was imposed upon him by the order dated 28.04.2016 when the case was remanded back to the Labour Court and fresh notice was directed to be issued to the respondent Management. This Court had considered the considerable and consistent delay occasioned by the petitioner in not filing his evidence. In the interest of justice so as to serve the petitioner's interest from any adverse order, this Court had allowed the petition by the aforesaid order dated 28.04.2016, however, subject to payment of the aforesaid costs. Insofar as the petitioner has not paid the said cost, the order of remand shall not be given effect to till the cost is paid.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner submits that there is no such institution as Delhi High Court Legal Services Authority, therefore, the money could not be paid. He submits that the Authority mentioned is Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. Let the cost be deposited with the latter Authority within three weeks from today.

The application stands disposed off in the above terms. NAJMI WAZIRI, J.

SEPTEMBER 30, 2016 sb