Union of India, Through Chief of Revenue, Central Coalfields Vs. Janki Mahto
& Ors  INSC 484 (2 April 1996)
K.Ramaswamy, K. G.B. Pattanaik (J)
JT 1996 (4) 287 1996 SCALE (3)608
O R D
issued is sufficient service in respect of respondent Nos.1, 6, 8-11, 14, 16,
18, 20-24, 28, 31, 34, 36-39, 41-45, 48-98, 100-109, 111 and 113. Notices sent
with Acknowledgements Due have not been received back. They must be deemed to
have been served. Notice on respondent Nos. 12, 13, 17, 33 and 47 have been
received back without any date.
notice on them must be deemed to have been served.
only question is: whether the High Court was justified in granting the interim
directions as prayed for.
view of the circumstances of the case, we think that the High Court would have
granted interim stay of the execution of the award which is the subject matter
of the appeals in the High Court.
appeals are accordingly allowed, There shall be stay pending appeal, as prayed
for. The High Court is requested to dispose of the appeals as expeditiously as
possible. No costs.