Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2013 DIGILAW 564 (SC)

N. L. Pritam Singh & Co. v. Agardi Ram

2013-05-08

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, T.S.THAKUR

body2013
Judgment : Heard. Arguing counsel for the petitioner is not available. A request for an adjournment is made on his behalf. Counsel for the respondents points out that despite the direction passed by the High Court under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act not a single penny has been paid to the respondents. He further points out that the order under challenge is one passed by a Bench of single Judge of the High Court against which letters patent appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court is maintainable. In support of his submission he places reliance upon a decision of this Court in Employer in Relation to Management of Central Mine Planning and Design Institute Ltd. v. Union of India and Anr. - JT 2001 (2) SC 87. In the circumstances, therefore, we deem it proper to direct that the petitioner shall deposit the entire amount, payable in terms of the impugned order passed by the High Court, in this Court within six weeks from today. In case the deposit is not made, interim order of stay granted by this Court stands vacated without any further reference to the Bench. Post for final hearing after ensuing summer vacation.