Dismissed

Dina Nath Yadav v. Beekay Engineering Corporation and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2016WP/150/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order records the disposal of two writ petitions concerning labour matters by the Industrial Court, Bhilai. The High Court disposed of both petitions in terms of a previous order dated 11-5-2016 in a related writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Both writ petitions disposed of in terms of the order dated 11-5-2016 passed in W.P. No.74/2000. No order as to costs.

Dina Nath Yadav Vs Beekay Engineering… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR

¶4

Writ Petition No. 150 of 2000

¶5

Shri Dina Nath Yadav, S/o Shri Sita Ram Yadav, aged 41 years, C/o Kashyap Kirana Stores, Near Rashtriya Vidyalaya, Baikunt Nagar, Camp-11, Bhilai, Distt. Durg, Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh) -490 001.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Beekay Engineering Corporation, 45/47, Industrial Estate, Bhilai(M.P.)(nowC.G.)

¶8

Industrial Court, Bench Raipur, Krishna Sadan, 16 HIG, Shankar Nagar, Raipur.

¶9

State of Madhya Pradesh (now State of Chhattisgarh), Through the Secretary, Department of Labour, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal.

¶10

-—Respondents

¶11

AND

¶12

Writ Petition No.600 of 2000

¶13

Surendra Tiwari, S/o Shri Markhande Tiwari, aged about 41 years, R/o Baikunth Nagar, Camp-2, Bhilai, Distt. Durg.

¶14

—-Petitioner

¶15

Versus

¶16

The General Manager, Beekay Engineering Corporation, 45/47, Industrial Estate, Bhilai, Distt. Durg.

¶17

Member Judge, Industrial Court, Bench Raipur, Distt. Raipur. -—Respondents

¶18

For Petitioners: . Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate.

¶19

Hon'ble Shri Justice Saniav K. Aarawal

¶20

Order_On_Board

¶21

14/09/2016

¶22

The Lqbour Court passed an award dated 16-10-1999

¶23

r" N«" W^A

¶24

¶25

deciding Reference Petition No.9/MPIR Act/96 (General Secretary, Pragatisheel Engineering Shramik Sangh v. B.K. Engineering Corporation) against which B.K. Engineering Corporation filed W.P.No.4927/1999 as well as the Union filed W.P.No.74/2000. In the said reference, the present petitioners both were employees. W.P.No.4927/1S99 has been allowed in whereas W.P.No.74/2000 has been dismissed part completely.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the appeal preferred on behalf ofthe employees by the Union has already been dismissed and thewrit petition preferred by B.K. Engineering Corporation has already been allowed, these writ petitions be disposed in terms of the order dated 11-5-2016 passed in the aforesaid writ petitions.

¶27

The prayer is fair and reasonable.

¶28

Both the writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the order dated 11-5-2016 passed in W.P.No.74/2000. No order as to costs.

¶29

A copy of the order dated 11-5-2016 passed in W.P. No.74/2000 be made part ofthis order.

¶30

Sd/Sanjay K. Agrawal Judge

¶31

Soma

Dina Nath Yadav v. Beekay Engineering Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dina Nath Yadav v. Beekay Engineering Corporation 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

Smt. Shakila Begum Vs Bhupendra Kumar Sahu

Amar Sai and Others Vs Rukmen and Others

Banshi Lal Vs Shakil Ahmad

Surendra Tiwari Vs General Manager,Beekay Eng. and Anr.

Abdul Gani Qureshi Vs Bhilai Engineering Corp. and Ors.

Tilak Ram Vs Mahrajo