MANAV BHARTI UNIVERSITY v. THE JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER-CUM-APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND OTHERS
CWP/4306/2019 · 2025-11-17
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 29636 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 29636 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.4306 of 2019
Decided on: 17.11.2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Manav Bharti University
…..Petitioner
Versus
The Joint Labour Commissioner-cum-appellate Authority . and Ors
`
.....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Shekhar Badola, Advocate vice
Mr. Param Sharma, Advocate, for the
petitioner. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General for respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr. Somesh Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
On 21.12.2019, notices of this writ petition were issued with further direction to the Appellant Authority ( respondent No.1) not to release the amount deposited by the petitioner to respondent No.3.
2.
Subsequently, CMP No. 1358 of 2023 was instituted by the respondent No.3, seeking to release the
1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2 awarded amount statedly lying deposited in the Registry of this Court. The application was allowed on 06.10.2023 with direction to the Registry to release the amount in favour of the applicant by remitting the same in her saving bank account, subject to her furnishing undertaking to the effect that in the event of petition being allowed, the applicant would refund the amount alongwith up to date interest. The office has pointed out that the petitioner has not even deposited the amount.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner pleads no instructions, hence, the present writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua November 17, 2025
Judge R.Atal