FAIZAN UDDIN, N.G.KARAMBELKAR
PRAKASH DRAVID – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent
( 1 ) THESE four Letters Patent Appeals have been filed against a common order dated november 2, 1997 passed by a learned single judge of this Court in Writ Petition Nos. 1364/1997, 1360/1997, 1270/1997 and 1267/1997, out of which these appeals arise, and shall be disposed of by this common order.
( 2 ) THE appellants/petitioners who were workmen filed the aforesaid petitions for a direction that the respondents shall continue them in service and shall regularise them in service on the ground that their termination from service is illegal. It is contended that they are entitled to the benefit of Section 25-F of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the act ). Return was filed in W. P. No. 1358/1997 and it was adopted by the counsel for the respondents in other cases also. The learned writ Court considered the entire material on record in great detail in paras 5 to 11, In para 9 the learned single Judge while dealing with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act relied on the decisions in Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Orissa AIR 1977sc31: 1976 (4) SCC222 : 1977-I-LLJ-1, mohanlal v, Bharat Electronics Ltd. AIR 198
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.