Jharkhand High Court
Jharkhand Building And Other ... vs M/S Anvil Cables Private Limited And Ors on 10 February, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Navneet Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A No. 497 of 2024
-----
Jharkhand Building and other Construction Workers Welfare Board
through its Secretary Rakesh Prasad ... ... Appellant
Versus
M/s Anvil Cables Private Limited and Ors. ... ... Respondents
With
L.P.A No.495 of 2024, LPA No. 496 of 2024, LPA No. 506 of 2024, LPA
No. 507 of 2024, LPA No. 508 of 2024, LPA No. 509 of 2024 & LPA No. 566 of
2024.
-------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate
For the Resp No.1 : Mr. Salona Mittal, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. SC
Mr. Karamdeo, Advocate
Mr. Amit Kumar, SC (Mines)-II
Ms. Apoorva Singh, AC to SC (Mines)-II
For the JUVNL : Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, SC
------
Order No.07/Dated: 10th February, 2025
We have heard Mr. Krishna Murari, the learned counsel
appearing for the appellant today for about more than 45 minutes.
2. Since inception the implication of the judgment rendered by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "U.P Power Transmission
Corporation Limited & Anr. Vs. C.G Power & Industrial Solutions
Limited & Anr." reported in (2021) 6 SCC 15 based upon that the order
has been passed by the learned Single Judge.
3. The purpose of our query is that if the law has already been laid
down for putting restriction upon the "Labour Cess" from the supplier
who is only supplying the materials as per paragraph nos.51 to 54 of the
said judgment, Mr. Krishna Murari, the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant has submitted that he is not having with the copy of the said
judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
4. This Court is very much surprised that when the basis of the
order passed by the learned Single Judge is solely based upon the
judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "U.P Power
Transmission Corporation Limited" (supra), then how can it be
accepted that the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has not
gone through the said judgment.
5. The basic question which requires consideration that if the law is
already there putting restriction upon no "Labour Cess" upon the
material supplied and if taking into consideration the aforesaid aspect of
the matter the learned Single Judge has passed an order, then merely on
the ground of non-impleadment, which is the basis of filing the instant
intra-court appeal, can be said to be proper reason to interfere with the
order passed by the learned Single Judge, will it not amount to empty
formality and futile exercise if there is already restriction imposed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court having binding effect in view of Article 141 of the
Constitution of India.
6. Mr. Krishna Murari, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant
has sought for adjournment for today to go through the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of "U.P Power Transmission
Corporation Limited" (supra).
7. The same has vehemently been objected by the learned counsel
appearing for the respondent-M/s Anvil Cables Private Limited.
8. It has been submitted by referring to the order passed by a co-ordinate
Bench dated 03.10.2024 by which the contempt proceeding being
Contempt Case (Civil) No.430 of 2024 has been stayed until further
orders. It has been contended that for the aforesaid reason only the matter
is being sought to be adjourned.
9. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties, let the
matter be listed on Board on 13.02.2025.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
Sudhir
