- (1.) THE above -captioned special appeals arises out of the judgment and order dated 5.4.2013 and corrected judgment and order dated 12.4.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in writ petition No. 2235 of 2004 (SS) and connected writ petitions. By the impugned judgment, learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and quashed the notice dated 12/13.4.2004 published in 'Amar Ujala' newspaper being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution as well as Section 6 (N) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Further appellants were directed to reinstate the respondents/petitioners in service with all consequential benefits.
(2.) THE main ground of attack of the impugned judgment is that a Division Bench of this Court, vide judgment and order dated 19.2.2009 passed in Special Appeal No. 510 (S/B) of 2004 :V.K. Agnihotri Vs. State of U.P. and others and connected appeals, while allowing the special appeals, remitted the matter to the learned Single Judge with a direction to decide three questions framed in the judgment.
(3.) ACCORDING to the counsel for the appellant, learned Single Judge did not find it necessary and expedient to answer first two questions framed by the Division Bench and has only mentioned that these questions have lost their relevance in light of being answered to question No. 3. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant, the third question framed by the Division Bench was to the effect "In the event the Court decides the question whether the termination was bad and in that case what relief should be given to the appellants". Learned Single Judge has decided the issue on the basis of only aforesaid question alone holding that even if it is presumed that the respondents/petitioners are workman then too they cannot approach the Labour Court for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the writ petition i.e. arbitrariness, violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and has further observed that Labour Court is not authorized to entertain the writ petition.;