IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7896 of 2006 POPULAR NURSINGH HOME THROUGH ITS TRUSTEE RAJ KUMAR JAISWAL ASHOK RAJ PATH, CHAUHATTA, PATNA- 800 004 :---PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE SECRETARY LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, BAILY ROAD, PATNA-1. 3. MAHABIR OJHA, S/O- SRI SANKAR DAYAL OJHA, C/O- SRI BISHRAM SINGH, N/19 PROFESSOR COLONY CHITRA GUPTA NAGAR, PATNA-20 :---RESPONDENTS. with CWJC No.8860 of 2006 POPULAR NURSINGH HOME THROUGH ITS TRUSTEE RAJ KUMAR JAISWAL, S/O- LATE BRIJ NANDAN LAL, ROAD NO.1, RAJENDRA NAGAR, DISTT- PATNA. ASHOK RAJ PATH, CHAUHATTA, PATNA- 800 004 :---PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE SECRETARY LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, BAILY ROAD, PATNA-1. 3. MAHABIR OJHA, S/O- SRI SANKAR DAYAL OJHA, C/O- SRI BISHRAM SINGH, N/19 PROFESSOR COLONY CHITRA GUPTA NAGAR, PATNA-20 :---RESPONDENTS. with CWJC No.10101 of 2006 POPULAR NURSINGH HOME THROUGH ITS TRUSTEE RAJ KUMAR JAISWAL ASHOK RAJ PATH, CHAUHATTA, PATNA- 800 004 :---PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE SECRETARY LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, BAILY ROAD, PATNA-1. 3. MAHABIR OJHA, S/O- SRI SANKAR DAYAL OJHA, C/O- SRI BISHRAM SINGH, N/19 PROFESSOR COLONY CHITRA GUPTA NAGAR, PATNA-20 :---RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the petitioner : M/S V.N.Shahay & Arun Shrivastava, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Shyameshwar Kumar Singh, A/C to G.P.-12. For Private Respondent: Mr. Madan Prasad Singh, Advocate. ======== 3. 02.05.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and the counsel for the workmen. 2. Petitioner-employer is aggrieved by the order dated 10.03.2006 passed in B.S.E. Case No. 36/1995, 19/1995, 09/1994, Annexure-1, whereunder request of the 2 workmen for substitution of the trustee of the employer Sri Brij Nandan Lal has been allowed. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that Brij Nandan Lal left for his heavenly abode on 28.12.1999 during the pendency of the aforesaid case before the Labour Court. Steps for substitution of Brij Nandan Lal was required to have been taken within a reasonable time but petition for such purpose was filed belatedly on 25.05.2005, taking into account the delay in filing the substitution petition as also the fact that there is no provision in the Shops & Establishment Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for substitution of the parties in the proceeding taken under the Act this Court should set aside the order dated 10.03.2006, Annexure-1. 3. Counsel for the workmen with reference to the provisions contained in Section 39 of the Act submitted that provisions of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 is applicable mutatis mutandis to the parties to whom the provisions of the Act is applicable and with reference to the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act any substitution petition filed belatedly by the employee can always be entertained for substituting the earlier trustee by the present trustee. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties as also having perused the order of the High Court dated 25.02.2011 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 14384 of 2009 and other analogous matter, I am of the view that this Court has held under the said order that the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act is applicable to the parties 3 (employer and employees) under the Act, the Labour Court in seisin of the proceeding under Section 28(2) of the Act has the jurisdiction to substitute the deceased trustee with the succeeding trustee. In the present case the petition having been filed for substitution can even otherwise be allowed by deleting the deceased trustee and by adding the succeeding trustee. Accordingly, it is directed that the court below should delete the deceased trustee from the array of parties in B.S.E. Case No. 9/94 and 19,36/95 and add the succeeding trustee as a party in those cases so as to protect the interest of the employer, namely, the juristic person. The petition already filed by the workmen for deletion/substitution of the trustee be treated as a petition for addition of parties in all the three cases and the three cases be heard together. 5. The writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)