The appellant filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Bombay High Court praying that the Deputy Commissioner of Labour should be directed number to take any further proceedings in relation to the closure application dated 11.5.2007 under Section 25 O. Since that writ petition was dismissed, hence this appeal by way of Special Leave Petition.
1240 of 2007.
The appellant, which represents the workmen companycerned, opposed the very entertainment of the second closure application under Section 25 O on the ground that the first application was withdrawn but without liberty from the companycerned authority to file a fresh application.
Only about 275 employees did number accept the abovementioned VRS and 230 of these were the petitioners before the High Court.
Hence the respondent company filed fresh application under Section 25 O 1 on 11.5.2007 before the Commissioner of Labour, Mumbai.
In response, the respondent company wrote a letter to the Honble Minister for Labour dated 11.4.2007 stating that it was willing to discuss the matter in dispute and would attend the meeting.
CIVIL APPEAL NO 5458 OF 2007 Arising out of Special Leave Petition Civil No.
Heard learned companynsel for the parties and perused the record.
There was an overwhelming response to the said VRS and more than 6300 employees opted for the new VRS, and were accordingly relieved from service on payment of VRS benefits and all other legal dues.
15199/2007 MARKANDEY KATJU, J. Leave granted.
This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 16.8.2007 passed by the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.
