HIND LAMP LIMITED Vs. DEPUTY LABOUR COMMR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri V.B. Singh learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Vijay Sinha learned counsel for the appellant and Shri B.N.. Singh learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) Shri B.N. Singh learned counsel submits that the present Special Appeal at the instance of the appellant is not maintainable. According to him, the order dated March 27, 2002 passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Agra granting permission to the appellant to lay off its workmen is an order of Tribunal. This Court had passed the order in exercise of its power of general superintendence under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India and in view of the provisions of Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, the Special Appeal is not maintainable. He relied upon the decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ram Kripal Singh v. U.P, State Road Transport Corporation, Lucknow and others, 1999-II-LLJ-763 (All-DB).

(3.) Shri V.B. Singh learned senior counsel however, submits, that the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge has all the trappings of final order since the order dated March 27, 2002 passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner has been stayed and further direction has been issued that a fresh application be made complying with the rules, if any, and if such an application is made the same shall be disposed of in accordance with law expeditiously. According to him, in view of direction issued by the learned single Judge, there remains nothing to be decided in the writ petition and, therefore, the present Special Appeal is maintainable. He relied upon the decision of Division Bench in the case of State of U. P. and others v. Renu Tiwari and 29 others, 1993 (22) ALR 233. He also relied upon another decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Prof. Y. C. Simhadri, Vice Chancellor, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi and others v. Deen Bandhu Pathak, 2001 (45) ALR 495.