IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 8216 of 1993 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : YES to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- VITTHAL BARKU Versus RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 8216 of 1993 MR NR SHAHANI for Petitioner No. 1-4 MR KS NANAVATI for the respondent MR RAJNI H MEHTA for the respondent -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI Date of decision: 29/01/2003 ORAL JUDGEMENT Mr.Rajni H. Mehta, the learned advocate for the respondent produces on record a Note dated 16.1.2003 stating therein that three applications of the subject matter of this petition, in respect of three of the present petitioners have been withdrawn by the concerned petitioner-workmen. The fourth petitioner herein is the Union, which naturally cannot have objection if the dispute is settled between the individual workmen and the employer. Mr.Mehta further states that the individual workmen have taken voluntary retirement. Therefore, also the present petition has become infructuous. 2. Mr.Shahani, the learned advocate for the petitioners has no instructions in particular from the concerned petitioners. However, he states that if the aforesaid statement is true, he has no objection if the petition is disposed of as infructuous with a liberty reserved to move the Honourable Court in case of difficulty. 3. The present petition is disposed of as infructuous. Rule is discharged. Interim orders are vacated. No order as to costs. Liberty to move in case of difficulty. (Ravi R. Tripathi, J.) karim