Skip to content


T. Satyanarayana Vs. Labour Court, Guntur and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLabour and Industrial
CourtAndhra Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petition No. 1599/85
Judge
Reported in(1988)ILLJ133AP
ActsEstablishments Rules, 1968 - Rule 21(2)
AppellantT. Satyanarayana
RespondentLabour Court, Guntur and anr.
Excerpt:
labour and industrial - second appeal - rule 21 (2) of establishments rules, 1968 - period of limitation for filing second appeal - such period to be counted from date of receipt of full text order and not on receipt of short order - appellant could ascertain reasons for such order only after receipt of full text order - only after such receipt he could decide whether to prefer second appeal or not. - .....this writ petition is directed against the endorsement of the labour court, guntur, returning the appeal filed by the petitioner barred by time. it is also mentioned in the endorsement that the labour court has no power to condone the delay in filing the second appeal. the endorsement says that the "short order" was received by the petitioner on 29th may 1984, that the second appeal has to filed within thirty days from the date of receipt of the short order i.e., on or before 28th june 1984, but that the second appeal was received by post on 9th july 1984, and therefore it is barred by ten days. 2. the petitioner says that the short order means only the operative portion and that after receiving the short order, he applied for the full text of the judgment of the first appellate.....
Judgment:

1. The Court at admission stage made the following ORDER :- This writ petition is directed against the endorsement of the Labour Court, Guntur, returning the appeal filed by the petitioner barred by time. It is also mentioned in the endorsement that the Labour Court has no power to condone the delay in filing the second appeal. The endorsement says that the "short order" was received by the petitioner on 29th May 1984, that the second appeal has to filed within thirty days from the date of receipt of the short order i.e., on or before 28th June 1984, but that the second appeal was received by post on 9th July 1984, and therefore it is barred by ten days.

2. The petitioner says that the short order means only the operative portion and that after receiving the short order, he applied for the full text of the judgment of the first appellate authority on 30th May 1984 itself. He says that it was supplied to him along with letter dated 20th June 1984. The original letter is placed before me. It supports the said contention. In my opinion, the petitioner is entitled to wait till he gets the full text of judgment and then only decide whether to file a second appeal or not. He cannot be expected to take such a decision on the basis of a mere "short order" which does not contain the reasons for the judgment, but only the conclusion. Indeed in this case the short order dated 19th May 1984 is also placed before me. It does not contain any reasons for its conclusion. It is also evident from the memorandum of second appeal that the petitioner enclosed the copy of the full judgment received by him along with the memorandum of second appeal. In such a case, the calculation of limitation from the date of receipt of short order is not warranted. The period taken for obtaining the full text of the judgment must be excluded from consideration while calculating the period of limitation prescribed for filling the second appeal.

3. Sub-section (3) of Section 41 says that a second appeal shall lie to the Labour Court "within thirty days from the date of communication of the decision". According to Rule 21(2)(f) of the Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishments Rules, 1968 :

"The result of the appeal shall be communicated to the parties as soon as possible. Copies of the orders shall also be furnished to the parties, if required by them. The copies shall be on stamped papers to be furnished by the parties."

This clearly shows that the parties are entitled to the copy of the order, i.e., full text of the Judgment and since they can take a decision, whether to file an appeal or not, only after receiving the full text of the judgment, the period between the date of their application for copy of the full text of the judgment and the date of receipt for the same, should necessarily be excluded. Taking the other view would amount to compelling the parties to blindly file an appeal on the mere communication of the result of the appeal, which is not in the interests of the parties or in the interests of justice. Without the full judgment, they cannot also urge the grounds of appeal properly. It may very well happen that a party after perusing the full judgment, may be satisfied with the reasons assigned therein and may decide not to file an appeal.

4. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. It is directed that the Labour Court shall not treat the appeal as barred by time and entertain the same according to law.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //