(Through Hybrid Mode) vs Prahallad Sundar Ray & Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 224 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                             WP(C) No.16647 of 2016
                             (Through Hybrid mode)
            M/s. Gupta Power Infrastructure     ....           Petitioners
            Limited and another
                                       Mr. S.P. Mishra, Senior Advocate

                                        -Versus-
            Prahallad Sundar Ray & another          ....      Opposite Parties



                     CORAM:

                      JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
                      JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
                                       ORDER

05.01.2023 Order No.

5. 1. Mr. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner. He submits, opposite party no.1 workman claimed reinstatement and back wages by statement of claim under section 2-A (2) in Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He demonstrates from paragraph-3 that allegation is, he joined employment of his client w.e.f. 4th May, 1994 but there is no disclosure to support such allegation. The workman also alleged, subsequently he was transferred to opposite party no.2.

2. He submits, a person making a claim to be an employee must identify his employer. That has not happened by the statement of claim. Hence, impugned order should be interfered with.

3. He submits further, there is no connection between his client and opposite party no.2. To that effect, his client made

application for deletion of its name but by impugned order dated 28th July, 2016, the labour Court rejected it.

4. Coordinate Bench by order dated 20th December, 2016 had directed issuance of notice. We by order dated 19th December, 2022 found good service on the workman, who remains unrepresented. However, we notice that address of the workman given in the petition is simply that he is of Sunjanpur Delanga, Puri. Hence, a cloud is cast as to where or with whom intimation was left by the postal authority. On top of that, acknowledgment due card was not returned regarding service on opposite party no.2.

5. On query from Court Mr. Mishra draws attention to disclosure in I.A. No.17244 of 2022 (his client's application) disclosing order dated 15th November, 2022 of the labour Court indicating the proceeding is to be resumed, on the interim order passed earlier by coordinate Bench being deemed to have been vacated by operation of judgment law rendered by the Supreme Court.

6. For purpose of notice to opposite parties, we direct stay of proceeding in I.D. Case no.1 of 2016 till next date of hearing. Our Order is to be forthwith communicated to the Court below and thereupon expected to be noticed by opposite parties, the workman and Premier Cables and Conductors Pvt. Limited. Petitioner will file affidavit of service on adjourned date.

7. List on 16th January, 2023.

                                                      (Arindam Sinha)
                                                             Judge


                                                         (S. K. Mishra)
Padma                                                       Judge