Court quashed the Authority's ex-parte and dismissal orders, directing parties to appear before the Authority within a specified timeline for fair hearing on the respondent's wage claim application.
Orders dated 16.02.2017 and 10.08.2017 set aside; parties directed to appear before Authority on 02.07.2018.
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.
$~23
M/S G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD. …Petitioner Through: Mr.Gulshan Chawla and Mr.Satya Prakash Singh, Advocates.
versus
RAM BABU ARYA ...Respondent Through: Mr.R.S.Jena, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
VINOD GOEL, J. (Oral)
Page 1 of 2
WP (C) 9834/2017
filed necessary application which was dismissed on 10.08.2017 with costs.
(VINOD GOEL) JUDGE
MAY 11, 2018 dkb
Page 2 of 2
WP (C) 9834/2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the proceedings under the Delhi Shops and Establishments Act against the petitioner were conducted in accordance with procedural requirements.
Whether the petition should be disposed of and the parties directed to appear before the Authority.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/S G4S Secure Solutions India Pvt. Ltd.
Ram Babu Arya
Vinod Goel
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
