^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER SecondParty RESPONDENTS FirsitParty Writ Petition (L) No. 6924 of2007 Maharshi Vidya Maiidir, Bilaspur tlirou^i Principal, Maharshi Vidya Mandir, Mangla, Bilaspur, Smt. Reena Singh W/o Sliri A.K Singli, aged about 38 years, R/o Bilaspur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (CO). VERSUS 1. Smt. Chaiti Bai, W/o Sri Sakharam Manikpuri, Ex- servant (Arya) C/o Slri Aiiil Dixit, in fi-ont ofMaharshi Vidya Mandir, Maigla, District Bilaspur (CG). 2. Presiding Qfidcer, Labour Court, Bilaspur (under I.D. Act). Sahu (WRTT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'UeMr.SatishK.AemhotrLJ.) Present : 8mt Hamida Siddique, Advoeate foi- the petitioner. Shri S.P. Kale, Advocate forthe respondent No. 1. None for the respondeiit No. 2. ORALORDER (Passed on 04UI ofFebruary, 20OT) 1. The petitioaer impugns the order dated 06.11.2007 (Annexure P/l) passed by the Presiding OfBcer, Labour Court, under I.D. Act, whereby, the non applicant (petitioner, hereia) vfas not permitted to depose in the pending case as she failed to appear on 06.11.2007. 2. Shri S.P. Kale, leamed coiuisel appearing for the respondent No. 1 submits that without going into merit ofthe case, the petitioner/noii-applicant may be permitted to depose and examine herself iii the case No. 24/IDA/2005 (Ref). 3. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that due to some tragedy in the family of the petitioner/non-applicant, she could not appear earlier. She will appear and depose in tlie &st week ofMarch, 2008. 4. It is ordered accordingly. 5. In view of the foregoing, nothing remains to be adjudicated upon in this case. Thus, petition is allowed to the above extent. No order asto costs. Sd/- ,;. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^- K" '^"'-\._ :' ?^^^^*;a3^a-,.^^_ "s^