The High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn by the petitioner, who intended to prefer an application before the BIFR instead.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 532 of 2012
NOBLE EXPLOCHEM LTD., NAGPUR. VERSUS
EMPLOYEES P. F. ORGANIZATION AND ANOTHER
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders
Mr. A. P. Wanchasunder, Advocate for the petitioner. Dr. R. S. Sundaram, Advocate for the respondents.
CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR AND P.B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : 22nd FEBRUARY, 2012.
Mr. Wachasunder, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that since the petitioner want to prefer an application before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR), he is not pressing this writ petition.
In view of the statement made by the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
If any such application is preferred by the petitioner, the B.I.F.R. to consider the same in accordance with law.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Diwale
Noble Explochem Ltd.
Employees P. F. Organization
P.B. Majmudar
P.B. Varale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
