WPMS/2220/2009
2021 Latest Caselaw 1273 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  MCC No. 798 of 2013
                                  CLMA No. 219 of 2009
                                  In
                                  WPMS No. 2220 of 2009
                                  Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. I.P. Kohli, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Advocate for the private respondents.

As against the dismissal of Appeal, against the an order dated 27th June, 1997, passed by the Prescribed Authority under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, the Appellate Court had dismissed the Appeal by an order of 4th August, 1999. The said order has attained finality, as it has not been disturbed, when it was put to challenge in Writ Petition No. 801 of 2004. But, however, in the judgment rendered on 28.08.2004, in the aforesaid Writ Petition, the liberty was left open for the petitioner to make a representation, pursuant to which, the subsequent proceedings has arisen which has been decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court by the judgment of 10th September, 2013.

Against which a review has been preferred th on 12 November, 2013, on the ground that the petitioner would be entitled for compensation under Sub-section (3) of Section 15 of the Act. This Court is afraid that the said latitude of the interpretation of Sub-section (3) of Section 15 of the Act, cannot be entertained into in a review petition at this stage, particularly, when the principle orders have already been held to have attained finality in pursuance to the findings recorded by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 28th August, 2004.

Hence, I do not find any merit in the Review Application. Consequently, the same would stand rejected.

The Delay Condonation Application would also stand disposed of accordingly.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) Dated 01.04.2021 Shiv