PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH CHIEF OFREVENUE, CENTRAL COALFIELDS Vs. RESPONDENT: JANKI MAHTO & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/04/1996 BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J) CITATION: JT 1996 (4) 287 1996 SCALE (3)608 ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Notice issued is sufficient service in respect of
respondent Nos.1, 6, 8-11, 14, 16, 18, 20-24, 28, 31, 34,
36-39, 41-45, 48-98, 100-109, 111 and 113. Notices sent with
Acknowledgements Due have not been received back. They must
be deemed to have been served. Notice on respondent Nos. 12,
13, 17, 33 and 47 have been received back without any date.
Therefore, notice on them must be deemed to have been
served.
The only question is: whether the High Court was
justified in granting the interim directions as prayed for.
In view of the circumstances of the case, we think that the
High Court would have granted interim stay of the execution
of the award which is the subject matter of the appeals in
the High Court.
The appeals are accordingly allowed, There shall be
stay pending appeal, as prayed for. The High Court is
requested to dispose of the appeals as expeditiously as
possible. No costs.