Disposed

Mumbai Shramik Sangh L v. the Rashtriya Chemicals andFERTILIZERS Ltd.and Ors.

Bombay HC8 Nov 2006WP/329/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition concerning a representation regarding the petitioner's representation, the High Court of Bombay directed the Appropriate Government to decide on the representation by 08 December 2006, maintaining status quo for four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Appropriate Government to decide on representation by 08 Dec 2006; status quo maintained for four weeks.

Mumbai Shramik Sangh L Vs the Rashtriya… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

 .[1].

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

 WRIT PETITION NO.329 OF 1998
 ALONG WITH
 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.230 OF 2000
 IN
 WRIT PETITION NO.329 OF 1998

¶4

 Mumbai Shramik Sangh ...Petitioner.

¶5

 Versus

¶6

 The Rashtriya Chemicals &
 Fertilisers Ltd., & 2 Ors. ...Respondents.

¶7

 ....
 Mr.Bhavesh Parmar i/b. Colin Gonsalves, Advocate
 for the Petitioner.
 Mrs.Swati Deshpande i/b. M.S.Bodhanwalla & Co.,
 for Respondent No.1.
 Mr.Y.R.Mishra, counsel for Respondent No.3-Union
 of India.

¶8

 CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND
 SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ.

¶9

 DATED : NOVEMBER 08, 2006.

¶10

 P.C.:

¶11

 . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner

¶12

 and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶13

 2. We have perused our order dated 16th
 December, 2004. It appears that the Appropriate
 Government was to take decision on the
 representation made by the petitioner. It appears

¶14

 .[2].

¶15

 that the petitioner had already made a

¶16

 representation on 1st November, 2004. As directed
 by this Court, the Appropriate Government was to
 take a decision on such a representation on or
 before 10th January, 2005. However, Mr.Mishra the
 learned counsel appearing for Union of India
 states that he is still not aware as to what has
 transpired.

¶17

 3. We, therefore, direct that the Appropriate
 Government to take a decision with regard to the
 said representation in any event on or before 10th
 December, 2006. Needless to state that the
 Appropriate Government will also take into
 consideration the submissions of the

¶18

 respondent-employer before taking a decision.

¶19

 4. It is also made clear that the status-quo

¶20

 as of today to be maintained and the said
 status-quo to be maintained for a period of four
 weeks after the communication of the decision
 taken by the Appropriate Government.

¶21

 5. Writ petition stands disposed of

¶22

 .[3].

¶23

 accordingly.

¶24

 6. In view of the disposal of the petition,
 nothing survives in Notice of Motion. Notice of
 Motion is also disposed of.

¶25

 [DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.]

¶26

 [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]

Mumbai Shramik Sangh L v. the Rashtriya Chemicals andFERTILIZERS Ltd.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mumbai Shramik Sangh L v. the Rashtriya Chemicals andFERTILIZERS Ltd.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Roop Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

J.N.Sukumaran Vs I.D.B.I.

Vinayaka Ice Creams Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors. and Parshar C. Mehta (Applicant)

Padmashri v.Kadam Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sarva Shramik Sangh Vs National Center for Software Technology and Ors.

C.K. Traders Vs Mun. Corpn. of Gr. BOMBAYand Ors.