IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14123 of 2006 M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. having its Bottling Plant at E-1, Industrial Area, Patliputra, Patna 800013 and Registered Office at 13, Abdul Fazal Marg, New Delhi through Saikat Sarkar, Regional Counsel Legal son of G.C. Sarkar, resident of 331/332, Solifaire Corporate Park, 167 Guru Hargovind Marge, Chakala, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400093… … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Labour, 2. Oriental Beverages Ltd. (Gold Spot) Employees Union, Patna, represented by their workmen through Sri Chandra Prakash Singh.. … Respondents For the Petitioner: Mr. Jitendra Singh, Sr. Advocate M/s Kumar Manish and Anjay Kr. Jha, Advocates For Respondent No. 2: M/s Alok Kumar Sinha, Indrajeet Bhushan and Manish Kumar. For the State: Mr. A.D. Siddiqui, AC to GA 10 ----------- 7 20.07.2011 This application has been filed seeking quashing of the order of reference as contained in Annexure 3 and the order dated 13.10.2006 as contained in Annexure 10, whereby the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner has been rejected by the concerned Labour Court. On 21.12.2006 upon I.A. No. 5389 of 2006 filed on behalf of the petitioner, the further proceedings of Reference Case No. 20 of 2002 pending before the Labour 2 Court, Patna, as well as the operation of the impugned order dated 13.10.2006, as contained in Annexure 10, was stayed during the pendency of this writ application. Subsequently, I.A. No. 5994 of 2008 was filed on behalf of the petitioner with a prayer to dispose of the writ application in view of the settlement reached between the parties memoranda thereof which have been brought on record as Annexures 11/1 and 11/2. Today a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner stating that in view of the memoranda of settlement reached between the Management of M/s Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Limited Patna and their Workmen represented by Orient Beverages Ltd. (Gold Spot) Employee Sangh dated 04.02.2008 and 17.06.2008 the services of altogether 32 casual workers/employees out of 36 have already been regularized as per the terms of the settlements and they have been issued appointment letters in fulfilment and to the satisfaction thereof. With regard to the remaining four casual workers, whose names are described in paragraph no. 8 of the supplementary affidavit, it has been stated that they have left the services of the Company before the terms of the 3 settlements dated 04.02.2008 and 17.06.2008. Thus, it is contended that now no industrial dispute requires to be adjudicated. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 accepts the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the petitioner and the parties agree that the court concerned be directed to pass necessary orders in view of the settlement reached between the parties and the subsequent developments appointing 32 casual labourers/employees. He also admits that since four casual workers have left their services prior to the aforesaid settlements no dispute subsists with respect to them. Learned counsel for the State does also not raise any objection. In view of the aforesaid developments, this order is being passed with the consent of the parties. Let a joint petition be filed on behalf of the parties before the Labour Court, Patna in Reference Case No. 20 of 2002 within six weeks along with a copy of this order and also the appending therewith the copies of the aforesaid settlements. On having done so, let a decision be taken by the Labour Court, Patna in view of the aforesaid settlement 4 and subsequent developments within four weeks thereafter. This writ application stands disposed of as per the observation/direction indicated above. SC ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)