1 k i E MITION i ET IoNER , { 1 w“a- w#.a_.B ‘ b $ 1 x RESPONDENTS , 1. M.P. State Road Transport Corporation Through the Managing Director. ' Headquarter office Habibgang, » I BHOPAL(MP) The Depot Manager, ¢ I t M P S R T Copcratlon D1v151ona1 office ‘ Ralpur. / , ' presidlng offlcer, ‘ , Industrlal Court Indore (MP). 1 'DARTICULABS,OF THE PETITIONER: WRIT pETITION m? 1-1 g /2ooo UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUT F TNnIA Virendra Singh s/oxshr'i Ram’Narayan Singh; ~ Aged about 36 years, Conductor, M.P.S.R;T.Corporation, Raipur(MP): VERSUS / i IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUIICA’IURE AT JABALPUR( MP) -.,.~-yw~ .7 r W K , $tate oii whattiagarh Thragghi j’i’he 5&cretm Rnaé Transparii mwuramn, waM$nty Ddiagn waWaF3 ‘Raipuz- ‘ (3.6. y (3‘6. mirastmcmre Develcpment .caryaxatinm Thmagmi “ma managing rureckom CgGnzq‘ m: §ai§“r ‘C!G%§ ,I JWML—zim /Lluu HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. W. P. No. 5408 OF 2000 Peu'tioner : Virendra Singh Versus Respondents : M.P.S.R.T. Corporation & Others i Shri Bharat Rajput, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Axvind Dubey, Palm] lawyer for the State. \ ORAL ORDER (26th July, 2006) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the Industrial Court by order dated 1.8.2000 (Annexure P-Z) remanded back the matter to the Labour Court, on the ground that the Labour Court has passed an order directing the reinstatement of the petitioner without back wages eX-palte. It was found by the Industrial Court, that the respondents were not given suii‘icient opportunity to place their case before the Labour Court. In View of that, the" Industrial Court remanded back the matter to the Labour Court for fresh trial, after giving proper notice to the respondents, as stated in the operative part of the order dated 1.8.2000 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Industrial Court in Appeal No. 227,!MPIR/2000 and Appeal No.228/MPIR/2ooo. The Labour Court could not hear the matter, due to pendency of this petition in this Court. 3. I have heard 16amed counsel for the paxties and have perused the recexds appended to the petition. I am of the View that the order of the Industrial Court does not suEer from any intirmity and illegality, as to call for interfemnce by this Court, in exercise of its power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. The Writ petition is accordingly dismissed, with a direcn‘on to the Labour Court to dispose of the matter within a period of three months, keeping in View the delay in disposal of the matter in View of pendency of this petition. Files of the case be returned back to the Labour Court, forthwith. No order / . $5M“ u ° §aMlShK WQm as to costs. i/ wise L / /, /, / " ‘ /