Back
B. P. COLABAWALLA
Sesa Mining Corporation Limited – Appellant
Versus
Specified Authority And Joint Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging order for retrenchment permission (Para 2 , 3 , 10) |
| 2. facts of mining leases and operations (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. arguments for and against retrenchment (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. analysis of closure vs. retrenchment arguments (Para 22 , 23 , 30 , 31) |
| 5. final ruling and order of reinstatement (Para 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. Rule. With the consent of the parties, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, waive notice.
2. By the present Writ Petition, exception is taken to the Order dtd. 21/10/2022 ("impugned Order"), passed by the Specified Authority in the exercise of its powers of review. By the impugned order, the Specified Authority withdrew the permission granted to the Petitioner under Sec. 25-N of The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the 'ID Act') to retrench 313 workmen engaged by the Petitioner at the Bicholim Iron Ore Mines, Goa.
3. Initially, an application seeking permission for the aforesaid retrenchment was sought predominantly on account of the Petitioner ceasing to hold any Mining Lease in view of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goa Foundation vs.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
