Bombay High Court
Maharashtra State Coop.Cotton ... vs Punjabrao Gulabrao Chaudhari on 12 May, 2017
Bench: R.V. Ghuge
WP/4817/2001
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 4817 OF 2001
1. Maharashtra State Cooperative
Cotton Growers Marketing
Federation Limited,
Head Quarter at Nagpur
through its Managing Director
Office situated at Cotton Complex,
Ajani Chowk, Wardha Road,
Nagpur.
2. Maharashtra State Cooperative
Cotton Growers Marketing
Federation Limited,
Head Quarter at Nagpur
through its General Manager
(Administration),
Office situated at Cotton Complex,
Ajani Chowk, Wardha Road,
Nagpur.
3. Maharashtra State Cooperative
Cotton Growers Marketing
Federation Limited, Through
Zonal Manager,
Zonal Office situated at
Tarwadekar's Building,
Taroda Naka, Nanded. ..Petitioners
Versus
Punjabrao Gulabrao Chaudhari,
Age 53 years, Occ. Service
R/o at and post Katol,
Tq. Katol, Dist. Nagpur. ..Respondent
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Shri S.S.Wagh h/f Shri Shivaji T.Shelke
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
Dated: May 12, 2017
...
WP/4817/2001
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1. None appeared for the respondent on 9.5.2017 and even today.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by an interlocutory order dated
12.10.2001, passed by the Industrial Court, Jalna below application
Exhibit C-3 in Complaint (ULP) No.145 of 2001, by which, the said
application has been rejected.
3. While admitting this petition, this Court has granted interim
relief to the petitioner as prayed for. Consequentially, Complaint (ULP)
No.145 of 2001 has been stayed.
4. The interim order of this Court is in operation for almost 16
months.
5. The petitioner has prayed in application Exhibit C-3 that the issue
as to whether the respondent is a "workman" or not and whether the
Complaint is maintainable or not, should be decide as a preliminary
issue. By the impugned order, the Industrial Court concluded that it
would decide the said issue while deciding the interim relief
application.
6. It is settled law that the Court cannot grant interim relief to any
WP/4817/2001
claimant until the Court concludes that it has jurisdiction to entertain
the claim petition. In the instant case, the petitioner claims that the
respondent is not a workman under Section 2(s) of the Industrial
Disputes Act and, therefore, not an employee under Section 3(5) of
Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair
Labour Practices Act, 1971 and hence the complaint is untenable. The
Industrial Court has held that it would decide whether the respondent is
a workman or not, while deciding the interim relief application.
7. In the light of the above, this petition is disposed off.
8. The Industrial Court is directed to decide whether the respondent
is a "workman / employee" or not, while dealing with the application for
interim relief and by framing a proper issue to that effect. Needless to
state, in the light of the law laid down by this Court in the matter of
Dalal Engineering Pvt. Ltd. vs Ramrao Bhaurao Sawant And Others [1991
(4) Bom.CR 571 = (1992) IILLJ 384 Bom. = 1991 (2) Mh.L.J. 1534], the
Industrial Court would not grant interim relief unless and until it comes
to a conclusion that it has jurisdiction to entertain the Complaint. The
Industrial Court shall, therefore, decide the said issue and then
entertain the application for interim relief.
9. The Industrial Court shall, therefore, decide the Complaint (ULP)
No.145 of 2001 as expeditiously as possible and preferably on/or before
WP/4817/2001
31.3.2018. The petitioner shall appear before the Industrial Court on
17.6.2017. The Industrial Court would issue notice to the original
complainant and thereafter, proceed with the complaint.
( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )
...
akl/d
