1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 84 OF 2008 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 84 OF 2008 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 84 OF 2008 IN IN IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1693 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 1693 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 1693 OF 2007 Jose Kuriakose Plakiyil. .. Appellant. vs. M/s. K. Raheja Real Estate Services Pvt. Ltd., & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr. K. Chettiar i/by J.M. D’Silva for Appellant. Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar i/by K.D. Abichandani for Respondent No.1. Mr. S.K. Chinchalikar, AGP., for Respondent No. 2. CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & R.G. KETKAR, JJ. R.G. KETKAR, JJ. R.G. KETKAR, JJ. DATE: 26TH MARCH, 2009. DATE: 26TH MARCH, 2009. DATE: 26TH MARCH, 2009. P.C. . Heard. 2. The appellant was dismissed from service on the ground of insubordination i.e. failure to obey the orders of the employer. The appellant has been working 2 as the stenographer with the respondents and refused to attend the work assigned to him for taking down dictation for which he has been employed. This has been sufficiently established. Therefore, Labour Court as well as the larned Single Judge also found that there is no case made out to interfere with the findings of the Labour Court. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the written submissions were not taken into consideration and though he was absent on the day that was considered as refusal to work. The learned Single Judge has taken note of the same and found that the charge was not pressed. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the appeal. The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed. (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (R.G. Ketkar, J.) (R.G. Ketkar, J.) (R.G. Ketkar, J.)