Orissa High Court
WP(C)/9407/2026 of GLAXO PHARMA SMITHKLINE PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 24 June 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.9407 of 2026 Glaxo Pharma Smithkline Private Limited, Mumbai …. Petitioner Mr. Susanta Kumar Dash, Sr. Adv. Mr. A . Das, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha & another …. Opp. Parties Mrs. Suman Pattanayak, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE KRISHNA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.9407 of 2026
Glaxo Pharma Smithkline Private
Limited, Mumbai
….
Petitioner
Mr. Susanta Kumar Dash, Sr. Adv.
Mr. A. Das, Adv.
-Versus-
State of Odisha & another
….
Opp. Parties
Mrs. Suman Pattanayak, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE KRISHNA S. DIXIT
JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
Order No.
02.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
24.06.2026
The Management-Petitioner is knocking at the doors of the Writ Court for assailing order dated 16.01.2026 passed by the PO, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in ID Case No.04 of 2015 whereby the preliminary issue has been decided against it.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner vehemently argues that the impugned order is prima facie illegal, inasmuch as it ignores the legal evidence available on record and therefore, interference of this Court is highly warranted. He also submits that the Labour Court has the power to recall the order pursuant to decision of the Karnataka High Court in Management of Welcomegroup Windsor Manor Sherator and towers Vs. M.S. Subbaiah; 2001(1)LLN1182(Kar). He also adds that even when a preliminary issue of the kind is decided by the Labour Court, it can come to a different conclusion after the trial.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and having perused the Petition papers, we decline indulgence in the matter on the short ground that the order now made is during the pendency of the labour dispute before the Labour Court. By that order, the main proceedings have not culminated into any award. The only issue decided by the Labour Court arguably and tentatively is as to the legality and propriety of the domestic enquiry. It is the case of the Petitioner himself that the Labour Court can arrive at a different conclusion after the trial of the main matter. We will not express any opinion on that issue.
4. Ordinarily, the management should await the final outcome of the proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It is not that by the said order the remedy of the management is foreclosed once for all, inasmuch as in the event the award goes against it, this order made on preliminary issue can be made a ground for challenging the said award itself, this is consistent with the parliamentary policy enacted in Order XLIII Rule 1A of the CPC 1908 as amended by 1976 Act.
In the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed off without granting interference. All contentions are open for being urged before the Labour Court.
Registry to send a copy of this order to the Opposite Party- Workman for his file.
Web copy of this order to be acted upon by all concerned.
(Krishna S. Dixit) Judge
(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge
Prasant
Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 25-Jun-2026 10:18:22 Signature Not Verified