An instant writ petition challenging an Industrial Court order allowing an employee to correct his date of birth despite delay. Finding no error, perversity, or merit in the impugned order, the petition was dismissed.
Rule discharged. No order as to costs.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.3634 OF 2014
PETITIONERS
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS
Mr.R.N.Jain h/f Mr.D.S.Bagul, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.U.K.Patil, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr.S.P.Telgote, Advocate for respondent No.2.
( CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
DATE : 14/10/2015
ORAL JUDGMENT :
khs/Oct. 2015/3634-d
2
khs/Oct. 2015/3634-d
3
khs/Oct. 2015/3634-d
4
( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
khs/Oct. 2015/3634-d
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Industrial Court erred in allowing a complaint by an employee for correction of his date of birth beyond the stipulated period.
Whether the impugned judgment of the Industrial Court was perverse or erroneous.
Whether the High Court should allow the writ petition challenging the date of birth correction order.
The General Manager (P & R), MSRTC and Others
Narendra S/o Krushnarao Hingmire
Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Pulgaon
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
