a ^r '.^&'^^'^ aia*' S? 3 S %^ S <z^? '^?57 (S) BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT APPEAL No. \b^ /2010 APPELLANT PETITIONER / RESPONDENTS Rajendra Prasad Gupta S/o. Late Ramvachan Gupta, aged about 45 years, Occupation : Service, Time Keeper, Daily Wages Employee, Public Works Department (Buildings and Roads), Sub-Division : Ambikapur, R/o. Takia Road, Bauripara, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS :1. Industrial Court, Raipur, through its Member Judge, Industrial Court, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Labour Court, Ambikapur, through its Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) 3. Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (Building and Roads), Division No. 1, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) 4. Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Circle -Raigarh, Raigarh (C.G.) 5. Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Division (Zone) Raipur, Raipur(C.G.) ^t?-^S cft?ArtFtfW"-^' / 6. Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Sub-Division Ambikapur, Ambikapur District- Surguja (C.G.) WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2 (1) OF THE CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT (APPEAL TO DIVISION BENCH) ACT, 2006 Ki sa HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR W.A. No. 183of2010 AppeUant Rajendra Prasad Gupta Versus Respondeiits Industrial Court, Raipur & ofhers WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2(1) OFTHE CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT (APPEALTO DIVISON BENCH1 ACT.2006 DB: Hon'ble Mr. I. M. Quddusi, & Honlale Mr. N. K. Agarwal, JJ. Shri A. K. Prasad, Advocate for fhe appellaat. O RD E R (orall ( Passed on fhis 23rd day ofJune, 2010 ) Per I. 1. Heard learaed counsel appearing for fhe appeUaiit. 2. This appeal has been filed agam.st flie iiapugned order dated 20.4.2010 passed by ftie leamed Suigle Judge iu W. P. No. 500/2006 by which ftie lear&ed Single Judge while aUowiag fhe writ petitiou iii part reinanded the niatter to the Labour Court, Aiubikapur, quashiug fhe itnpugned orders dated 23.7,1998 and 17.8.2005 (Annexure P/5 and P/6 in fhe writ petition), to consider the case of fhe appeUant afresh and. record fhe findiags as to whefher he has actaally worked for 240 days or not and then to pass appropriate order. 3. We see no appropriate grouad to iaterfere with fhe uupugned order passed by the leamed Siagle Judge. The instaat writ appeal is disinissed. However, we feel fhat fhe Labour Court may dispose of fhe niatter as early as possible preferably wittuu foiu- monfhs froni fhe date of production of a copy of fhe order passed by fhe leanned Siagle Judge and a copy of fhis order. 1 -—-— Sd/-^ Sd/- | ^•K-Agrawal I.M. Quddusi Judge Judge Thatcur