##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

WRIT PETITION No.31962 OF 2023 Date: 23.03.2026

Between:

Talwar Auto Garages Private Limited, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Sunil Talwar, S/o., KR Talwar,

aged about 70 years …Petitioner

AND

The Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Hyderabad & another

…Respondents

ORDER:

Heard Sri Sai Prasen Gundavaram, learned

Counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondent No.1 and Sri M.Vijaya Kumar Goud, learned Counsel for the

respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.2 worked in the petitioner Company

##PAGE2##

2 SK,J W.P.No.31962 of 2023

and he was removed from service on the ground of unauthorized absence in the month of January, 2003. Thereafter the respondent No.2 filed petition before competent authority under Section 48 of the Telangana State Shops and Establishments Act, 1988 (herein referred as ‘the TSSE Act, 1988’) on 20.06.2003 and the same was numbered as SE.No.237 of 2003 and the same was allowed on 18.04.2016 by directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent No.1 herein into service with continuity of service with full back wages and all other attendant benefits/ consequential benefits. Thereafter, the petitioner filed I.A.No.1 of 2017 in S.E.No.237 of 2003 to re-open the matter on merits and to pass orders after affording an opportunity of hearing and the said petition was dismissed by the respondent No.1 on 31.01.2019. Thereafter, the petitioner filed W.P.No.21118 of 2019 and the said writ petition is pending before this Court. Thereafter, the respondent No.1 issued show cause notice to the petitioner on 25.06.2019 calling for explanation from the petitioner herein with regard to the payments

##PAGE3##

3 SK,J W.P.No.31962 of 2023

made to the respondent No.2 in pursuance to the orders passed in SE.No.237 of 2003 dated 18.04.2016. In spite of submitting affidavit by the petitioner on 01.07.2019, the authority forwarded the recovery application under Section 51(2) of the TSSE Act, 1988 before the XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Criminal Court, Nampally, Hyderabad and the same was numbered as Crl.MP.No.361 of 2021. The entire proceedings initiated by the respondent No.1 is illegal and contrary to the provisions of Section 48(5) of the TSSE Act, 1988. The Criminal Court instead of adopting the procedure prescribed under Section 48(5) r/w. 421 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 insisting the presence of the writ petitioner herein as it is a criminal offence. Thus, the procedure adopted by the Court below in Crl.MP.No.361 of 2021 is illegal and contrary to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and requested to allow

the writ petition by setting aside the said proceedings.

##PAGE4##

4 SK,J W.P.No.31962 of 2023

3. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 basing on the counter filed by the respondent No.2 submits that the respondent No.2 served in the petitioner-Company from 05.09.1993 to 07.12.2002 and the petitioner-Company terminated the services of the respondent No.2 without compliance of the mandatory provisions of Labour Welfare Legislations. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent No.2 approached the respondent No.1 by filing S.E.No.237 of 2003 under Section 48(1) of the TSSE Act, 1988. After disposal of the said S.E.No.237 of 2003 on 18.04.2016, the petitioner- Company herein filed I.A.No.1 of 2017 before the respondent No.1 and the same was dismissed on 19.01.2019. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.21118 of 2019 and this Court was not inclined to interfere into the orders passed by the respondent No.1. The petitioner has not filed any Appeal under Section 48(3) of the TSSE Act, 1988 by questioning the orders passed by the respondent No.1 in S.E.No.237 of 2003 passed under Section 48(2) of the TSSE Act, 198, as such

##PAGE5##

5 SK,J W.P.No.3

Click Here to Read the rest of this document