IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04.03.2010 CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.No.15868 of 2000 The Management of Indicarb Limited Rep. By Executive Director, 63, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Hosur 635 126. .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Salem. 2.Mrs.Bhuvaneswari ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the first respondent in Approval Application No.1/98 and quash its Order dated 31.03.2000. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ravindran for M/s.T.S.Gopalan and Co. For Respondents : Mr.J.Narayana Murthy for R2 O R D E R The petitioner is the Management. They have come forward to challenge the order passed by the Labour Court, Salem in Approval Petition No.1 of 1998 dated 31.03.2000. 2. The writ petition was admitted on 12.10.2000 and an order of interim stay was granted for a period of four weeks. Subsequently, the stay was extended. In the meanwhile, pending the proceedings before the Labour Court, the Workman G.Narayanan for whose dismissal approval was sought for died and his wife Bhuvaneswari was brought on record. 3. As against the dismissal of the workman dated 27.06.1991, the petitioner had file the approval petition since already the dispute in I.D.No.135 of 1990 was pending before the Labour Court. In so far as the condition precedent for https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ filing such an approval petition, namely one month notice pay or wages in lieu of notice pay, the management did not comply with the said condition. The Labour Court held that since the discharge order passed against the Late Narayanan was not preceded by any enquiry, it cannot grant any approval. It was against this order, the writ petition has been filed as noted already. 4. For seeking approval, it is incumbent upon the Management to comply with the three pre-requisites namely, notice pay or wages in lieu of notice, simultaneous filing of application and conducting of enquiry in accordance with the principles of natural justice or in accordance with the Standing Orders.The learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to state whether the Standing Order applicable to the Management contains a clause for dispensing with the enquiry. Even otherwise the Labour Court found that there was no justification in not conducting the enquiry. 5. In the light of the above, there is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the Labour Court,Salem. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar. svki To The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Salem. 1 cc to M/s. T.S. Gopalan, Advocate, Sr. 15344 W.P.No.15868 of 2000 AKR (CO() kk 12/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/