Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24966 (GAU)

MANAGEMENT OF HATTIGARH TEA ESTATE v. THE PRESIDING OFFICER and ANR.

WP(C)/20/2014 · 2025-12-04

Rajesh Mazumdar

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010257322014 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/20/2014 MANAGEMENT OF HATTIGARH TEA ESTATE A UNIT OF AMALGAMATED PLANTATION P LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANGER REGD. OFFICE AT HATTIGARH, P.O. HATTIGARH, DIST- UDALGURI, BTAD, ASSAM, PIN-784524 VERSUS THE PRESIDING OFFICER and ANR. LABOUR COURT, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN-781001 2:BONGSHI NAYAK THE WORKMAN REPRESENTED BY AKHIL BHARATIYA CHAH MAZDOOR SANGHA TANGLA DIST- UDALGURI BTAD ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.K KONWAR, MRK SINGH,MR.K K MAHANTA,MR.N K KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : MR.S SARMA, ,SC, L C , Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 05-12-2025 This writ petition is filed in the year 2014 where the award dated 27.12.2010 passed by the Labour Court had been challenged. The interim protection prayed for by the petitioner was rejected on 05.03.2014. The matter was listed on 30.03.2017 and 14.11.2022. The petitioner was given an opportunity to cure the defects with regard to the notices required to be served upon the respondents. Today, none appears for the parties and there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Although Mr. S. Gautam, learned counsel appears, he submits that the brief had been withdrawn by the client from them in the year 2020 itself and therefore, he is also without instruction. In view of the above, it appears that the writ petitioner is not interested to pursue the matter in its present form. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed as not pressed. TCR called for and received be returned forthwith. JUDGE Comparing Assistant