Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
MCA/1834/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 1834 of 2010
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4215 of 2010
=========================================================
JAGADISH
BHOLERAM - Applicant(s)
Versus
ARVIND
POLICOT & 5 - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MSGRVIJAYALAKSHMI
for
Applicant(s) : 1,
None for Opponent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 18/08/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard
learned advocate Ms. G. Vijayalakshmi for applicant original
petitioner.
2. In
present application, the applicant has prayed to restore SCA No.4215
of 2010, as while disposing the said petition vide order dated
7.4.2010, the advocate for the applicant original petitioner was
not heard. The order dated 7.4.2010 is quoted as under :
1. List
has been revised twice, learned advocate Mrs. Parikh not remained
present on both occasion. However, Labour Court has rejected
reference on 9/1/2002 and petition is filed by petitioner in the year
2010 on 15/3/2010. So, there is a delay of more than 8 years in
challenging award in question.
2. Therefore,
considering decision of this Court reported in 2006 (2) GLH 472 and
2006 (5) SCC LabIC 791, present petition can not be entertained by
this Court. After this much delay, there is no explanation at all
given by petitioner for delay in filing present petition. Therefore,
present petition is accordingly dismissed in default.
3. No
doubt, the submissions made by learned advocate Ms.G. Vijayalakshmi
is correct that order has been passed by this Court in absence of
advocate of petitioner. But simultaneously this Court has also made
certain observations on merits about delay in filing the petition as
well as some of the decisions are also considered. Therefore, in such
circumstances, it is not proper for this Court to recall the order
which has been passed by this Court on 7.4.2010. Therefore, since the
applicant original petitioner is having alternative remedy to
challenge the aforesaid order before the appellate Bench, the present
application is not entertained by this Court only on that ground.
Accordingly, present application is disposed of without expressing
any opinion on merits.
(H.K.RATHOD,J.)
(vipul)
Top