Partly allowed

Alka v. Raman International

Delhi HC17 Aug 2011W.P.(C)/2662/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge order addressing a batch of writ petitions challenging industrial tribunal awards. The court found the respondent company was de facto served after initially refusing notice, deemed the tribunal's judgments perverse, and set aside the awards for remand.

What did the court decide?

Impugned awards set aside; references remanded to Tribunal for fresh adjudication and fresh service.

Alka Vs Raman International — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2011)

¶1

Signature Not Verified Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:09.09.2024 16:54 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file an d no page is missing.

¶2

¶3

..... Respondent

¶4

RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. With 44 4- W.P. (C) 2659/2011 MAYADEVI ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates versus RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. With 145 + W.P. (C) 2660/2011 VINOD KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates versus RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. With :46 1⁺ W.P. (C) 2661/2011 MOHD. RAFIQ . . .... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates Versus page no 216 : W.P. (C) 2656/2011

¶5

RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None With 47 + W.P. (C) 2662/2011 ALKA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates versus RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. And 48 + W.P. (C) 2663/2011 DINESH CHANDER SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjoy Ghose with Mohd. Faruk, Advocates versus RAMAN INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through None. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER o/o 17.08.2011 1. An affidavit of dasti notice has been filed by Mr. Babu Ram, clerk of learned counsel for the Petitioner. He states therein that he along with W.P. (C) 265612011 pagenoJ/6

¶6

¶7

process server of this Court reached the last knmvn address of Respondent M/s. Raman International at E-2/77-78, Sita Puri, Janakpuri, Delhi on 25th July 2011. Initially one Mr. Satyan who was present there confirmed that the Respondent company was operating from the said premises but later on instructions from someone over telephone refused to accept dasti notice on 25th July 2011. He infonned that the office was of one Dynamic Firm and not ofM/s. Raman International. The process server visited the other address of Respondent company, i.e., T-1/88, Mangolpuri Industrial Area, Phase-!, Delhi - 110 083 on 1st August 2011. The guard at the premises informed the process server that it was the office of M/s. So han Global.

¶8

Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners pointed out that the address given for the Respondent in the Industrial Tribunal ('Tribunal') was at T-1/88, Mangolpuri Industrial Area, Phase-!, Delhi- 110 083 but clearly the Respondent company has shifted from there to the Janakpuri address.

¶9

On a perusal of affidavit of last service, this Court is satisfied that the Respondent refused to accept notice of the writ petition when sought to be W.P. (C) 265612011 page 110 416

¶10

page 110 416

¶11

served at E-2/77-78, Sita Puri, Janakpuri, Delhi. The Respondent should be presumed to having been served. None has appeared today on behalf of the Respondents.

¶12

In its order dated 2t 11 April2011 this Court while directing notice to issue noted that the impugned A wards prima facie appeared to be perverse and without application of mind and that, the matters required to be remanded to the Tribunal for a fresh adjudication.

¶13

Accordingly, the impugned Awards are hereby set aside. The respective reference in each petition is remanded to the Tribunal for a fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The respective references will now be restored to files of the Tribunal and will be listed for directions on 26th ' September 2011. The Tribunal is directed to once again issue fresh notice to the Respondent management at E-2/77-78, Sita Puri, Janakpuri, Delhi through its authorized representative.

¶14

· • 6. The writ petitions are disposed of in the above terms. Order be given dasti to learned counsel for the Petitioners.

¶15

W.P. (C) 26561201 I

¶16

page no 5/6

¶17

A certified copy of this order be delivered to the concerned Tribunal

¶18

:within three days from today.

¶19

S. MURALIDHAR, J

¶20

AUGUST 17,2011 .rk

¶21

W.P. (C) 2656/2011 & batch

¶22

page no 616

Alka v. Raman International

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alka v. Raman International

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jai Ram Vs the Management of Sona Fashion & Anr.

Narain Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Good Year Security Services Regd Vs Gnct and Ors.

Bharat Singh & Ors. Vs D.D.A. & Ors.

S.T.P.Singh Vs the School Management of G.H.P.S.,Fateh Nagar & Ors.

Vk Chaturvedi Vs UOI

Global Educational & Social Trust Vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University & Ors.

Union of India and Anr. Vs Parcel Porters Association and Ors.

S Pargat Singh Vs Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee and Anr.

S Surjeet Singh Vs Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee and Anr.

Preeti Sharma Vs School of Correspondence Course

Mohd Rafiq Vs Raman International

Brahma Nand Vs Raman International

Mahesh Singh Vs Raman International