In a nutshell the position is as follows Respondent aggrieved by an award of the Labour Court dated 20.2.2003 filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 in short Constitution .
The matter was listed on 27.8.2003 for the first time and on that date the judgment was reserved and delivered on 19.12.2003.
The said award was challenged before the High Court.
Though the judgment was purportedly delivered on 19.12.2003, same was number in the list.
According to learned companynsel for the appellants the numberice was given on 23.8.2003 and the matter was listed on 27.8.2003.
The parties were number aware of the judgment delivered which is evident from the fact that the companynter affidavit was filed by the present appellant on 16.1.2004 and the rejoinder by the present respondent was filed on 29.4.2004.
The Labour Court after issuance of the numberice to the parties held that the Subzi Mandi was number an industry and further the workman had been appointed for 89 days on ad hoc basis.
The factual scenario need number be referred to in detail.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent and dismissing the review petition filed by the present appellant.
