- (1.) Delay condoned.
(2.) Leave granted.
(3.) The first respondent was working as a cleaner-cum-driver with a private operator. As a result of nationalisation, the respondent lost his job. He filed an application before the Labour Court, which was dismissed. There against, he filed a writ petition upon which the order under challenge was passed. The Division Bench that heard the writ petition noted that the circular upon which the respondent had relied before the Labour Court did not apply to cleaners. The respondent's counsel directed the attention of the division Bench to orders whereby it had directed the appellant Corporation to appoint displaced persons as cleaners though they had worked as drivers and had been found ineligible by the appellant Corporation for the post of cleaner. Learned counsel prayed for a similar direction, and the High Court said: "having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of justice, we feel it appropriate to direct the Corporation to absorb the petitioner as cleaner provided he is willing. " A review petition by the appellant Corporation was dismissed.;