Q /‘ Q) of 1994. 7 Misc.Petition ¥, _M N2. x L} LN TI-EJ HIGH COURT OF MADHYA' PRADESH‘ JABALEUR. Managing Director, Bhilai steel Plant, .§ Petitioner ‘ (Unit of Stsel Authority of India Lt&) i Bhilai. \J ’ ’ ’ * Versus. Cfgq0011lgg§ 1; Industrial Court,M.P. Bench Raipur, Sha nka r Na ga r, Raipur. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Civil Lines, Durg. 3. chhabilal s/o Paltu, ' C/o Prakash Kirana $tores, Oppo.Government School. Villege Chhaoni, P.O.Industrial Estate, Bhilai : 49C326. .. Respondents. In the matter of petition under Articles 226/227 of the constitution of Injia7 AND ,In.the matter of M.P.Industrial Rela— tions Act, 196d(Act No.27 of 1960)m ...__.__ Xl-HC—78 WWWW? ' wPv .. WWW mzoo merw(u3faa§) 61 auésrairm ammsramia? M'nma’r#mm 'mmwma ‘ $ai1%msnésv ‘ Sarma 19 07 2005 Dr N K Shukla 8r Advocate wiih Mr. Suni! Marsha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. H.B.‘Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, learned counsel for respondent Nc .3. I.A.No.1192 of 1995 This is an applicatio'r for substiiuting the legal representatives of deceased respondent No.3, who died on 20.12.1993 before filing of the petition on 06.07.1994. The petitioner ought to have tiled this application for bringing legal representatives of deceased respondent No.3 on record along with the tiling of the writ petitioih. The petitioner has filed this application after a period of about 18 months from, the date of death of the respondent No.3. The etitioner has not assigned any reason and has not med any appl fling this application for substituing the legal representatives of respondent No3 as this applicaion is time barred Thus this application is dismissed ;ln View of the dismissal of e application for substituting the legal representatives of the de ased respondent No.3, the writ petition also stands dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is dismissed leaving the question of law involved in this petition‘as open. . Sdl— I») Satish K. Agnihotri Judge i