M/S Shanthinatha Press vs The Labour Officer on 12 June, 2008

6. It is evident from the impugned

order that the notice of the proceedings wee 3_

not served on the petitioner. There, is fed="

material on record to shew mthatf tfief ;

respondent has made efforts to serve netideAof*ffA

the proceedings on the *first” res§Qndent;:

The averment made in the writ petition is this

regard has stood_un–contrevertedf1f;Vf

?. Sinee fihg Order iepedned is without
notice to the_§etitioeer; it is opposed to the
principles_effr@gers1″§gstioe. Consequently,
writ peti:ioe’=osseeeeds: and accordingly

a1lowed§”‘_The *,order’ at Annexure*A. dated

a2iQ9»§O04?rnf*Annexure–A gassed in; the first

respondent ‘is. hereby’ quashed. The matter is

lflremitted _:o. the first respondent for fresh

~M$fiE$®QSai in accordance with law. The parties

f’sre> directed to appear before the first

i respondent on 28.?.2OG8 withoutr any’ further

iVinetice from the first respondent. The first

Vrespondent is directed to dispose of the

b.

i

matter on merits in accordance with lawflgaégia

expeditiously as possible. No costs.