Iti Ltd. Gonda Thru. Unit Head/Agm. v. Presiding Officer Labour Court U.P. Faizabad and 17 Others

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2025/9938/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition WRIT - C 9938 of 2025 by Iti Ltd., Gonda against an order of the Labour Court, U.P., Faizabad; dismissed as not pressed with liberty to re-file under Article 227; Article 226-versus-227 maintainability objection raised by respondent counsel but left undecided; certified copies/photocopies ordered returned; Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Court No. 17, Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, October 14, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Permission (as sought) to not press the present writ petition and to file a fresh petition under Article 227; certified copies, photocopies and other papers filed with the petition to be returned to the petitioner's counsel. ¶judg. para 4

Iti Ltd. Gonda Thru. Unit Head/Agm. Vs Presiding… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶judg. para 4

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition filed under Article 226 against the Labour Court's order is maintainable, or whether such a challenge must instead be pursued under Article 227 of the Constitution (point raised as counsel's preliminary objection; not adjudicated because the petition was withdrawn).

¶judg. para 2

Court's answer

On the petitioner's counsel declining to press the writ petition and seeking leave to file a fresh petition under Article 227, the Court granted that permission and dismissed the writ petition on the express ground that it was not pressed; the Article 226-versus-227 maintainability objection was accordingly left undetermined.

¶judg. para 4

Ratio / Principle

The Court directed that the certified copies and photocopies filed along with the writ petition be returned to the petitioner's learned counsel, retaining them on record until returned.

¶judg. para 5

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 17 — Subhash Vidyarthi, J. WRIT - C No. 9938 of 2025: Iti Ltd., Gonda (through Unit Head/AGM) versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P., Faizabad and 17 others. After hearing petitioner's counsel Dwijendra Mishra, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel Pankaj Srivastava, Ajay Pratap Singh (respondent nos. 2, 3, 6-10, 12, 19) and Pankaj Kumar Singh (respondent no. 16), the Court took note of respondent-side counsel's preliminary objection that a writ petition against the Labour Court's order is not maintainable under Article 226 and would lie under Article 227 of the Constitution. The petitioner's counsel elected not to press the petition and asked leave to file a fresh petition under Article 227. Granting that permission, the Court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed (judg. para 4) and ordered the certified copies and photocopies filed with it to be returned to the petitioner's counsel (judg. para 5). Decided October 14, 2025; the maintainability question itself was not adjudicated.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 9938 of 2025

¶3

Iti Ltd. Gonda Thru. Unit Head/Agm.

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

Presiding Officer Labour Court U.P. Faizabad And 17 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dwijendra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ajay Pratap Singh, Pankaj Kumar Singh

¶7

Court No. - 17

¶8

HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

¶9

यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री िद्वजेन्द्र िमश्रा, िवद्वान अपर मुख्य स्थायी अिधवक्ता श्री पंकज श्रीवास्तव तथा िवपक्षी संख्या 2, 3, 6-10, 12 एवं 19 के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री अजय प्रताप िसह तथा िवपक्षी संख्या 16 के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री पंकज कुमार को सुना तथा पत्रावली का अवलोकन िकया।

¶10

िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री अजय प्रताप िसह ने प्रारंिभक आपित्त करते हुए कथन िकया िक श्रम न्यायालय के आदेश के िवरुद्ध भारतीय संिवधान के अनुच्छेद 226 के अंतगर्त िरट यािचका पोषणीय नहीं होगी तथा यह यािचका भारतीय संिवधान के अनुच्छेद 227 के अंतगर्त पोषणीय होगी।

¶11

उक्त आपित्त के उत्तर में यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता ने कहा िक वह यािचका पर बल नहीं देना चाहते हैं तथा वह अनुच्छेद 227 के अंतगर्त एक नवीन यािचका प्रस्तुत करने की अनुमित चाहते हैं।

¶12

तद्नुसार, उपरोक्त अनुमित के साथ यािचका बल न िदये जाने के आधार पर िनरस्त की जाती है।

¶13

यािचका के साथ प्रस्तुत प्रमािणत प्रितयां, छायाप्रितयां अिभलेख पर रखते हुए यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता को वापस कर दी जायें।

¶14

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶15

October 14, 2025

¶16

Ankit

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ANKIT SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Iti Ltd. Gonda Thru. Unit Head/Agm. v. Presiding Officer Labour Court U.P. Faizabad and 17 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iti Ltd. Gonda Thru. Unit Head/Agm. v. Presiding Officer Labour Court U.P. Faizabad and 17 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amar Nath Trivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Jagdish Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Distt. Collector and 2 Others

Najma Khatoon Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayati Raj and 3 Others

Surya Pratap Singh and Others Vs Kunwar Chandra Pratap Singh and Another

Shahrar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Iti Ltd. Mankapur Thru. Unit Head/Agm Vs Presiding Officer Labour Court U.P. Faizabad and 20 Others