Dismissed
Uttarakhand Transport Corporation through Its Managing Director v. Mahipal Singh Saini
Uttarakhand HCWPMS/963/2014
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Date Office Notes, reports, orders or…
What the court decided
AI extract
Date Office Notes, reports, orders or…
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.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPMS No.963 of 2014 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. N.S. Pundir, Advocate for the petitioners. 2. Ms. Anupriya Upreti, Advocate holding brief of Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate for respondent- workman. 3. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has put to challenge the order dated 24.05.2010 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Haridwar, Uttarakhand in Adjudication Case No.493 of 2009, Mahipal Singh Saini vs. Uttarakhand Transport Corporation. 4. The attention of this Court is drawn by the learned counsel for the respondent- workman that the operative portion of the order has made it clear that the order impugned shall be subject to the final order which will be passed in Adjudication Case No.309 of 2009, M/s Uttarakhand Transport Corporation vs. Mahipal Singh Saini. |
|||
| 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent-workman that Adjudication Case No.309 of 2009, M/s Uttarakhand Transport Corporation Vs. Mahipal Singh Saini, has already been decided by the judgment and award dated 21.01.2013 and therefore, the writ petition has rendered infructuous and is dismissed accordingly. 6. The contention raised on behalf of the respondent-workman has not been doubted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, the petitioner may challenge the judgment and award dated 21.01.2013 referred above, if so advised. (Pankaj Purohit J.) 07.11.2025 Ravi |
Mahipal Singh Saini
Uttarakhand Transport Corporation
Pankaj Purohit
Ravi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court