JUDGMENT 1. - Petitioner had sought permission for lay off from the State Government under Section 25M of the Industrial Disputed Act, 1947. The permission was refused by the respondents vide order dated 14.6.2000. The same is under challenge in the present writ petition only on the ground that after expiry of period prescribed under the Act, the impugned order could not have been passed by the authorities and the application for permission deemed to have been accepted as provided under Clause (5) of Section 25M. 2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record. 3. The relevant clause of Section 25M is reproduced here as under : "(5) Where an application for permission under Sub-Section (1) or Sub-Section (3) has been made and the appropriate Government or the specified authority does not communicate the order granting or refusing to grant permission to the employer within a period of sixty days from the date on which such application is made, the permission applied for shall be deemed to have been granted on the expiration of the said period of sixty days." 4. Though application is dated 30.3.2000, however, admittedly, the same was received by the respondents on 11.4.2000. The impugned order has been passed on 14.6.2000 after expiry of 60 days. There is nothing on record to show that when the order dated 14.6.2000 was communicated to the petitioner. Be that as it may, since the order has been passed after expiry of 60 days, the deemed clause as referred above come into play and permission deemed to have been granted by the respondents. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 14.6.2000 is set aside. As per provisions of Section 25M, the concerned parties may now proceed further in accordance with law.Petition allowed. *******