V.H.BHAIRAVIA, S.B.MAJMUDAR
R. L. KALATHIA, BHAVNAGAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
( 1 ) THE learned Advocate for the petitioner is permitted file separate writ petitions under Art. 227 of the Constitution challenging common orders in group of Recovery Applications Nos. 320 to 471 of 1980 under Sec. 33 (C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 Special Civil Application No. 4256 of 1989 will be treated to be writ petition against the order in Recovery Application No. 320 of 1980. Separate writ petitions would be filed which may be treated as compa- nion writ petitions challenging common order in Recovery Applications Nos. 321 of 1980 to 471 of 1980 meaning thereby 151 additional companion petitions will be filed. They will bear necessary Court-fees. They will be filed on only one page showing names of the parties. Filing of rest of the pages in the petition and annexures dispensed with as they arise from the common award which was in consolidated proceedings. All these 152 petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.
( 2 ) RULE in each of these petitions. We have heard the learned Advocate for the workmen Mrs. Shah and Mr. Shah for Mr. Dave for respondents Nos. 1 and 2. These petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.
( 3 )
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.