- (1.) Heard Mr. Kalyan Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ananda Sen, learned counsel for the respondent CCL
(2.) It appears from Annexure-F to the counter affidavit that against an order passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner under the Payment of Gratuity Act, the petitioner did approach this Court earlier by filing a writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 413 of 2004. The said writ petition was not entertained by this Court but was disposed of by order dated 23.1.2004 in view of the fact that there was an alternative remedy of appeal, provided under the Act and as such, the petitioner was given liberty to prefer appeal against the impugned order before the appellate authority and it was. observed therein that in the event of limitation petition being filed, the same shall be considered in accordance with law.
(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that though pursuant to the liberty given by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition, he filed an appeal before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Dhanbad, but the Regional Labour Commissioner by the impugned order as contained in Annexure-7 to this writ petition, dismissed the appeal on the point of limitation and did not decide the appeal on its merit.;