Petitioner, a superannuated employee, sought withdrawal of a writ petition challenging an industrial court order regarding his date of birth, as all terminal benefits were offered by respondents.
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.
1/1
Chittewan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO.1864 OF 2006
Mr. Chandrakant R. Kamble … Petitioner Versus
Gold Mohur Mills And Another … Respondents
Mr. S.S. Pathak a/w Mr. T.R. Yadav for the Petitioner. Mr. Ratnesh Mishra i/b Mr. Avinash K. Jalisatgi for Respondent No.1.
CORAM : S.C.GUPTE, J.
DATE : 27 JULY 2016.
P.C. :
. The Petition challenges an appellate order passed by the Industrial Court, Mumbai, setting aside the judgment and order passed by the Labour Court in the Petitioner's application under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. The subject matter of the application was the correct date of birth of the Petitioner. Since the Petitioner is superannuated during the pendency of the Petition, and since the Respondents have offered to settle all terminal benefits applicable to the Petitioner, the Petitioner does not press the present Petition. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner accordingly seeks leave to withdraw the Petition. The Petitioner is present in person and instructs his Advocate to withdraw the Petition. The Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. The statement of the Respondents that all terminal benefits as may be applicable to the Petitioner shall be duly paid, is accepted. No order as to costs.
Chittewan
Gold Mohur Mills
S.C. Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
