https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175144 Where a Single Judge in substance exercises supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, no intra-court appeal lies if the governing provision permits appeals only from Article 226 orders. Withdrawal of an earlier writ petition without liberty did not bar fresh petitions on these facts, because the record did not show conscious abandonment of the claim. The Labour Court and Industrial Court were not required to decide maintainability as preliminary issues where voluntariness of retirement, coercion, payment and workman status were interlinked disputed facts; the issues could properly be tried with the merits. The High Court's direction to refund benefits received under the voluntary retirement scheme was upheld as an equitable condition to avoid unfair advantage pending adjudication. en-us Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Nov 2015 18:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175144 Where a Single Judge in substance exercises supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, no intra-court appeal lies if the governing provision permits appeals only from Article 226 orders. Withdrawal of an earlier writ petition without liberty did not bar fresh petitions on these facts, because the record did not show conscious abandonment of the claim. The Labour Court and Industrial Court were not required to decide maintainability as preliminary issues where voluntariness of retirement, coercion, payment and workman status were interlinked disputed facts; the issues could properly be tried with the merits. The High Court's direction to refund benefits received under the voluntary retirement scheme was upheld as an equitable condition to avoid unfair advantage pending adjudication. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175144