IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.767 of 2010 1. NARAYAN JHA S/O LATE YOGENDRA JHA R/O VILL.- DUDHIYAWA, SAREYA OJHA TOLA, P.O. SAREYA BAZAAR, P.S.- PAHARPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 2. SANTOSH KUMAR @ SANTOSH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA S/O LATE UMASHANKAR SRIVASTAVA R/O VILL.- KUMHIYA, P.O.- KHARPOKHRA, P.S.- BAGAHA, DISTT.- WEST CHAMPARAN 3. PRAKANT KUMAR SINHA S/O LATE RAJESHWAR PRASAD R/O VILL.- KARAMWA, P.S.- DHAKA, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 4. SADAN SAH S/O SHRI GOPAL SAH R/O VILL.- SATAHA, P.O.- NAWADIH, P.S.- PAHARPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 5. MITHU YADAV S/O SHRI JHABU YADAV R/O VILL.- SATAHA, P.O.- NAWADIH, P.S.- PAHARPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 6. JITENDRA THAKUR S/O SHRI SHIVSHANKAR THAKUR R/O VILL.- SATAHA, P.O.- NAWADIH, P.S.- PAHARPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 7. SRIDAM MANJHI S/O SHRI DHANGAR MANJHI R/O VILL.- KAPASHARIA, P.O.- BORA, P.S.- CHANDITALA, DISTT.- HOOGHLY (WEST BENGAL) 8. KUMAR RAJNISH S/O SHRI BIPIN BIHARI VERMA R/O VILL.- VAGAYANA, P.O.- MUSAHARWA, P.S.- SATHI, DISTT.- WEST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, BIHAR STATE GOVERNMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 3. THE LABOUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICER BETTIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN 4. M/S PRASAD REFRIGERATION AND AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., SATAHA P.O.- NOWADIH, P.S.- PAHADPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN, THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 5. MRS. PRATIMA PRASAD, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF PRASAD REFRIGERATION AND AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. SATAHA, P.O.- NOWADIH, P.S.- PAHADPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 6. MR. ARVIND KUMAR, DIRECTOR M/S PRASAD REFRIGERATION AND AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., SATAHA, P.O.- NOWADIH, P.S.- PAHADPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 7. MR. RAJESH KUMAR UPADHYAY, GENERAL MANAGER M/S PRASAD REFRIGERATION AND AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., SATAHA, P.O.- NOWADIH, P.S.- PAHADPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 8. MR. SUDHIR KUMAR SINGH, MANAGER FINANCE M/S PRASAD REFRIGERATION AND AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., SATAHA, P.O.- NOWADIH, P.S.- PAHADPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN ----------- 2/ 14/03/2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner finds it difficult to convince the Court that in the nature of the relief claimed against a ‘lay off’ which pertains to the domain of the Industrial Disputes Act and that in view of a remedy available under that Act the writ application is maintainable. He, therefore, prays for leave to withdraw the application to pursue remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act as the petitioner may be advised. 2 The application is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as aforesaid. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)