IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.102 of 2010 DEEP KUMAR MANTU @ DILIP KUMAR MANTU, SON OF LATE LAKHAN PRASAD CHAURASIYA @ LATE RAM LAKHAN PRASAD CHAURASIYA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE INDUPUR, P.S. BARAHIYA, DISTRICT LAKHISARAI ….OPPOSITE PARTY-PETITIONER. Versus 1. SUJATA DEVI, WIFE OF LATE RAJESH MAHTO 2. MANISH MINOR SON OF LATE RAJESH MAHTO 3. INDU KUMARI MINOR DAUGHTER OF LATE RAJESH MAHTO O.P. NO.2 AND 3 IS UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP OF O.P. NO.1 4. RAM LAKHAN MAHTO, SON OF LATE POKHAN MAHTO ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KASHIMPUR, AZAD NAGAR, P.S. MUFFASIL, DISTT. BEGUSARAI. 5. BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. P.O. REFINARY TOWNSHIP, KAPASIA, CHOWK, DISTRICT BEGUSARAI …PETITIONERS-OPPOSITE PARTIES. For the petitioner : Mr. Pravin Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For the opposite parties : None ----------- 05/ 14.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This petition has been filed for review of order dated 14.05.2008 by which this court dismissed C.R. No.102 of 2007 which was filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 14.10.2006 by which Commissioner Workmen’s Compensation, Munger Division, Begusarai rejected petitioner’s application under section 41 of the Workmen’s Compensation Rules 1924 for setting aside ex-parte order dated 25.08.2006 by which Deputy Labour Commissioner, Begusarai allowed Case No.W.C.20 of 2005 filed by the opposite parties and imposed fine upon the petitioner, who was the owner of the truck. - 2 - 3. It transpires that petitioner, who was the owner of the truck, had challenged the original order of Deputy Labour Commissioner dated 25.08.2006 before the Commissioner Workmen’s Compensation, Munger Division, Begusarai, whereas the insurer, namely the United India Insurance Company Limited through its Branch Manager challenged the aforesaid original order of the Deputy Labour Commissioner dated 25.08.2006 in Miscellaneous Appeal No.391 of 2006 and after hearing the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case a Bench of this court allowed the miscellaneous appeal and set aside order dated 25.08.2006 passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum- Commissioner Workmen’s Compensation, Munger Division, Begusarai and the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum- Commissioner was directed to refer the matter to the Labour Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the matter has been referred to the Labour Court as per the aforesaid order passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No.391 of 2006, but the authorities concerned are proceeding to act in accordance with order dated 25.08.2006 passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner Workmen’s Compensation, Munger Division, Begusarai on the basis of order dated 14.05.2008 passed by this court in C.R. No.102 of 2007. 5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this - 3 - civil review petition is disposed of with an observation that when order dated 25.08.2006 passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner Workmen’s Compensation, Munger Division, Begusarai has been set aside by a Bench of this court, there is no occasion for any of the authorities to take any step in that regard unless an order is passed by the Labour Court. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)