Smt Munni v. The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal - Cum- Labour Court - Ii , Gurgaon And ORS

CWP-4949-2022 -12024:PHHC:036725

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-4949-2022 Date of Decision: 12.03.2024 Munni ..... Petitioner

Versus

Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurugram and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER

Present:

None for the petitioner.

Mr. Satish Singla, DAG, Haryana.

***** HARSH BUNGER J. (ORAL) 1.

Petitioner (Munni) has filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing award dated 26.10.2021 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurugram, whereby the industrial dispute raised on behalf of petitioner, regarding termination of her services, has been decided against her.

A further prayer has been made by petitioner for directing respondent No.2 to reinstate her in service with full back wages, w.e.f. 15.10.2012.

2.

A perusal of file reveals that when the matter was taken up for APURVA 2024.03.15 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

CWP-4949-2022 -2hearing on 21.12.2023, the following order was passed by this Court:- "

The case has come up for hearing after a long interregnum after notice of motion was issued on 24.05.2022. Regarding service upon respondents, the office report reads as under :- "Notice R-1 - Served Notice R-2 - Unserved as locked for many years Notice R-3 - Unserved as "Adampata".

Learned counsel for petitioner is directed to supply correct details/address of respondents No. 2 and 3 within a period of 4 weeks from today. Upon doing so, let fresh notices be issued to respondents No. 2 and 3 for 12.03.2024. Learned counsel for petitioner be notified of the date fixed."

3.

As per Office Report, in pursuance of the aforesaid order dated 21.12.2023, learned counsel for the petitioner had been informed through e-mail, however even today, no one has appeared to represent the petitioner. It has further been stated in the Office Report that notices to respondents No.2 and 3 could also not be issued for want of process fee. 4.

It appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the instant matter any further.

5.

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

6.

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. 12.03.2024 (HARSH BUNGER) Apurva JUDGE

1. Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No

2. Whether reportable :

Yes/No APURVA 2024.03.15 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh