Sri B. N. P. Srivastava vs Life Insurance Corporation Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3409 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       Letters Patent Appeal No.1125 of 2018
                                         In
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9236 of 2016
     ======================================================

Sri B. N. P. Srivastava S/o- Late Kapildeo Prasad, resident of Moh.- J.P. Colony, Chandwara, P.S.- Town, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. Life Insurance Corporation Of India, a body corporate constituted by the Life Insurance Corporation of India Act, 1956 having its Head Office at ' Yogakshema', Jeevan Bima Mart, Mumbai - through the Senior Divisional Manager, Muzaffarpur Divisional Office, Uma Shankar Prasad Marg, Muzaffarpur-842001.

2. The Senior Divisional Manager, LIC of India, Muzaffarpur Divisional Office, Jeevan Prakash, Uma Shankar Prasad Marg, Muzaffarpur-842001.

3. The Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Govt. of India.

4. The Labour Enforcement Officer Central Imamganj, Behind Naka No. 4, Purani Naka Chawk, Muzaffarpur

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kaushalesh Choudhary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Abhimanyu Vatsa, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Rajnikant Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 01-08-2023

The appeal has been filed against an interim order

of the learned Single Judge staying the certificate proceedings

initiated by the petitioner before the Labour Court under Section

33C(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant informs us Patna High Court L.P.A No.1125 of 2018 dt.01-08-2023

that the dismissal of the appellant, an employee of the L.I.C.,

was interfered with by the Labour Court by order dated

09.07.2018, which was upheld up to the Hon'ble Supreme

Court. It was to get the fruits of the litigation that the certificate

proceedings were filed, against which the employer, L.I.C.,

came to this Court, and a stay was obtained as early as 2016,

hence the present appeal.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent-L.I.C.,

however, points out that there was a stay granted in the appeal,

which was challenged by the L.I.C. before the Hon'ble Supreme

Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had directed the employee

to approach the writ court to get the order vacated. The

appellant has not moved before the writ Court to get the order

vacated.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant, however,

points out that a petition was moved as early as on 06.09.2022.

5. We extract the order passed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 78 of 2022 which is as

below.

Leave granted.

The learned Single Judge is in seisin of the dispute and by order dated 09.07.2018 was pleased to admit the writ petition filed by the appellants and stayed Patna High Court L.P.A No.1125 of 2018 dt.01-08-2023

further proceedings in Certificate Case No. 322 of 2017. Instead of moving any application for vacation of this order, the respondent No. 1 straightaway preferred the LPA which was admitted by the order dated 18.02.2020 and the operation of the ex parte order granted by the learned Single Judge was stayed with a direction that the appeal should be heard on its own turn.

In our view, the affect of the impugned order would be to vacate the injunction without hearing the appeal.

We are of the view that if the respondent No. 1 was aggrieved by the order dated 09.07.2018, the appropriate course would have been to approach the learned Single Judge for necessary orders.

In view of the aforesaid, we set aside the order dated 18.02.2020 and leave it to the respondent No. 1 to move the learned Single Judge for appropriate orders for variation of the interim stay granted on 09.07.2018. The learned Single Judge may also consider whether the matter as a whole itself can be disposed of.

The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had directed the

appellant to approach the learned Single Judge for vacation of

the interim order passed, which is challenged in the present

appeal. In fact, the matter has been pending for long before the

learned Single Judge and in appeal before us.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.1125 of 2018 dt.01-08-2023

7. Considering the directions issued by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court, we are of the opinion that the L.P.A. can be

closed, leaving the remedy of the petitioner to agitate the cause

before the learned Single Judge. Especially considering the long

lapse of time, we would request the learned Single Judge to hear

the matter itself finally and pass a judgment as expeditiously as

possible.

8. The present Letters Patent Appeal stands

disposed of without any observation on the merits.

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

( Partha Sarthy, J) aditya/-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date          03.08.2023.
Transmission Date