State Of Pb.Etc. v. The Po Etc.




    
     

  !"#!$%&%"'()*)&  +, -!.  !"# )'/0'1'" -!2 33 ! % %"'!2& 4!2&)& -! 2!&%1%'* ##%$!2+50")2")2 +)21&6)2'1'" -!2 33 !&6"'1!' &   (  75

3 .
 .

.
.

 



  
      

   

  .

.
.
3 5 It may be noticed that despite service, the respondent No.2workman has not appeared and 24 years have passed since the filing of the present petition. Nothing has come on record as to whether, the respondent No.2-workman is alive and is still interested in defending the order for amendment of written statement, which has been impugned by the State in the present writ petition especially when the proceedings before the Labour Court were stayed by the Division Bench on 12.01.2001. 2.

Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitionerState submits that the present writ petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further with liberty to the petitioner-State to revive the same in case the impugned order causes any prejudice or respondent No.2 revives the proceedings before the Labour Court. HARSHA RANI 2025.08.02 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

  

  3.

Ordered accordingly.

4.

It may be noticed that without the specific permission of this Court the impugned order dated 12.10.2000 (Annexure P-5) will not be implemented.

5.

Let the order be conveyed to concerned Labour Court. )*)&  +,  .

.
.




















  !  "# 

 $ !  



 HARSHA RANI 2025.08.02 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document