SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(SC) 506

S.N.VARIAVA, S.RAJENDRA BABU
State Of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Hitkari Potteries LTD. – Respondent


ORDER

An application was made by respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) under Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short the Act ) for permission to close down the company on 15.1.1998. On 2.4.1998 a letter was sent by on behalf of the Government to the respondent to the effect that the application filed by it is defective in certain aspects and is hence rejected.

2. Under Section 24-O (3) of the Act if Government does not communicate the order granting or refusing to grant permission to the employer within a period of 60 days from the date on which such application is made, permission applied shall be deemed to have been granted on the expiration of the said period of 60 days.

3. In the present case the application was not disposed of within a period of 60 days from 15.1.1998 and a communication was sent only long after expiry of that period on 2.4.1998. In that view of the matter the view taken by the High Court that necessary permission as contemplated under the provisions of Section 24-O of the Act is deemed to have been granted appears to us to be correct and certain provisions have been made by the High Court in its order regarding protection o





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top