Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
M/s. MRF Limited – Appellant
Versus
The Appellate Authority, Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Act, 1946 – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed challenging return of appeal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counsel submissions on timely disposal. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. certifying authority's necessity addressed. (Para 5) |
| 4. directions given for timely processing of appeal. (Para 6) |
ORDER
The writ petition is filed for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the first respondent, namely the Appellate Authority – Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946/Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Puducherry, vide return memo dated
23.01.2026 in File No.SOA 63 of 2025.
2. When the matter came up for admission, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the appeal has been filed under the Industrial Employment Standing Orders Act, 1946. While so, the appeal has been repeatedly returned on the ground that the authority certifying the Standing Orders should also be made as a party. For the earlier returns, when the compliance was endorsed by stating that he is not a necessary party, repeatedly on the same ground the matter is returned. Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that even though it is a return, the petitioner is cons
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
