Asgar v. P. S. Viswambharan
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner filed writs seeking direction to Labour Court Kozhikkode to decide pending applications condoning delay and setting aside ex parte orders, while keeping coercive revenue recovery proceedings in abeyance.
What did the court decide?
Directed Labour Court to consider pending applications within 6 weeks and keep coercive revenue recovery proceedings in abeyance.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 18TH MAGHA, 1941
WP(C).NO.3474 OF 2020(H)
PETITIONER :
ASGAR, S/O. HANEEFA, FARM HOUSE, PARASUVAIKKAL VILLAGE, KOTTAMAM POST, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695121.
BY ADVS. SRI.TERRY V.JAMES SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN SRI.SHARAN SHAHIER
RESPONDENTS :
1 P.S.BALAKRISHNA KAMATH S/O. SADANANDA KAMATH, PULIKKAL VEEDU, KANNAVELI POST, KOCHI-682002.
- 2 MAHENDRAKUMAR, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SPICES PLANTATION PVT LTD, NELLIAMPATHY, CHITTOOR, PALAKKAD-678508.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Labour Court can entertain an application for condoning delay and setting aside an ex parte order after an award has become enforceable.
Whether coercive revenue recovery proceedings should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the petitioner's applications before the Labour Court.
Whether the High Court should direct the Labour Court to decide the pending applications expeditiously.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
ASGAR, S/O. HANEEFA
- respondent
P.S.BALAKRISHNA KAMATH
- respondent
MAHENDRAKUMAR, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SPICES PLANTATION PVT LTD
- respondent
THE LABOUR COURT, WAYAND ROAD
- respondent
THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, NEYYATTINKARA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court