D T C Vs. RAJ PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this review petition, petitioner has stated that this Court inadvertently passed order dated 13. 9. 2006 on merits by which the award made in favour of workman was set aside and matter was remanded back to labour court. It is submitted that this court had in fact reserved order on application under section 17b of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is, therefore, prayed that this court should recall order dated 13. 9. 2006 deciding the writ petition on merits.

(2.) IN reply to the petition, it is stated that the submissions made in the application are wrong. The Court had rightly passed the award.

(3.) A perusal of record shows that this petition was being posted for arguments from time to time and on 10. 8. 2006 this Court heard the arguments and reserved the order. Order dated 10. 8. 2006 shows that arguments were heard on CM No. 12796/2005 in WP (C) No. 11191/2005. In fact this order seems to be inadvertent. It has been practice of this Court to hear the arguments on the main petition itself in stead of hearing arguments once on interim application and then on main petition. Normally in order to decide the interim application, the merits of the case are required to be considered. Therefore, keeping in view that the matters do not hang on for long, this Court used to hear arguments on merits of petition. In this case response to the petition has already been filed and arguments were heard and the petition pending since July 2005, was disposed of by order dated 13. 9. 2006 on merits.