DIVYA PHARMACY Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed seeking to quash orders dated 26.05.2014 (Annexure No. 1) and 31.05.2014 (Annexure No. 2). These orders were passed by the third respondent, who is the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Haridwar. A direction was also sought to the third respondent to verify the facts as directed by the Apex Court in its true spirit and meaning.

(2.) Briefly put, the case of the writ petitioner is as follows:

(3.) The complaint of the writ petitioner appears to have been that 93 persons have been counted by the third respondent as persons entitled to the benefit of the settlement. The short controversy, which is sought to be raised by the writ petitioner, is that the third respondent has failed to consider the Apex Court's order in its true spirit. Expatiating on true spirit, apparently, support is sought to be drawn from the second paragraph of the order, which we have quoted, namely, that it was the bounden duty of the third respondent to ascertain whether the employees were in service. This mandate was observed in its breach by the Assistant Labour Commissioner. This is the complaint, which was projected by the writ petitioner.