Southern Structural Staff Unio v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.01.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and WP.MP.Nos.20211, 20213 & 20214 of 2004 Southern Structurals Staff Union Rep.by its General Secretary Regd No.1054/CPT No.3/1, 4th Cross Kamaraja Street Gandhi Nagar West Avadi, Chennai 600 054.

... Petitioner in both W.P.Nos.

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Secretary Department of Industries Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.

2.The Management of Southern Structural Ltd Rep.by its Chairman Cum Managing Director C.T.H.Road, Pattabiram Chennai 600 072.

1/6

3.Board for Industrial Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) Jawahar Vyapar Bhavan 9th Floor Annexe No.1, Tolstoy Marg New Delhi 110 001.

...Respondents in both W.P.Nos.

Prayer in W.P.No.17042 of 2004 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, after calling for the records relating to notification G.O.Ms.No.90 Industries (MIG.I) Department dated 17.09.2003 issued by the first respondent declaring the second respondent as a relief undertaking under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Relief Undertaking Act as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India to quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to act in conformity with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and other Labour Legislations, award costs.

Prayer in W.P.No.17043 of 2004 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, after calling for the records relating to notification G.O.Ms.No.90 Industries 2/6

(MIG.I) Department dated 17.09.2003 issued by the first respondent under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Relief Undertaking Act as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India to quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to act in conformity with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and other Labour Legislations, award costs.

For Petitioner in both W.P.Nos.

: Mr.V.Govardhanan For Respondents in both W.P.Nos.

: Mr. K.Surendran for R1 Additional Government Pleader Mr.Sushanth for R2 for M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co Mr.S.Thankasivan for R3 (CGSSC) COMMON ORDER When the matter came up for hearing, Mr.V.Govaradhanan the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that they have already given change of vakalat. The same is recorded. No other counsel 3/6

is appearing on behalf of the petitioner. The name of the petitioner is already printed in the cause-list. On a perusal of the prayer in the Writ Petitions, the petitioner challenges the notification of the Government in declaring the second respondent management as a relief undertaking as per GO.Ms.No.90 dated 17.09.2003 and GO.Ms.No.91 dated 17.09.2003. It can be seen that the declaration itself was issued for a period of one year and it was also a relief only with reference to the Sick Industrial Companies Act. Therefore, nothing further survives to be adjudicated in these Writ Petitions .

2. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 22.01.2025 dna 4/6

To The Secretary Department of Industries Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.

5/6

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY , J.

dna and WP.MP.Nos.20211, 20213 & 20214 of 2004 22.01.2025 6/6