Bibhishan Sheshrao Pawar vs Maharashtra State Road Transport ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2525 Bom

                                                    1                     wp6064.19.odt

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                         WRIT PETITION NO.6064/2019

      Bibhishan Sheshrao Pawar,
      Aged about 44 years, Occ. Service,
      r/o Dhotra (Jahangiri), Karanja Lad,
      Tq. Karanja Lad, Dist. Washim                          .....PETITIONER

                               ...V E R S U S...

      Maharashtra State Road Transport
      Corporation, through its Divisional
      Controller, Amravati.                                  ...RESPONDENT

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Mr. C. V. Jagdale, Advocate for petitioner.
 Ms Bhagyashree Reddy Advocate holding for Mr. V. H. Kedar,
 Advocate for respondent.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATED :- 08.02.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

by consent of learned counsel for the parties. Heard Mr. Jagdale,

learned counsel for petitioner and Ms Reddy, learned counsel

holding for Mr. Kedar, learned counsel for respondent.

2. Petitioner herein filed Complaint ULP No.69/2019

under Section 28 read with Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the

Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of

2 wp6064.19.odt

Unfair Labour Practices Act before the Industrial Court, Amravati

and prayed for setting aside order dated 27/31.05.2019 demoting

petitioner from post of Traffic Controller to the post of Conductor.

The petitioner also field an application for interim relief

under Section 30 (2) of the MRTU & PULP Act. The said

application is at Exh.U-2 on record of the Industrial Court.

Learned Member of Industrial Court, Amravati, vide order dated

06.08.2019 was pleased to reject the application for interim relief.

4. The petitioner is still working as Conductor. Complaint

ULP No.69/2019 is still pending on the file of learned Member,

Industrial Court. Mr. Jagdale, learned counsel for petitioner

submits that if this Court is not inclined to interfere with the

impugned order, Industrial Court, Amravati may be directed to

dispose of the complaint itself.

5. After having gone through the impugned order, I am of

the view that no fault can be found with the order passed by

learned Industrial Court. Therefore, I am not ready to interfere

with the impugned order. However, the complaint filed on behalf

of the petitioner is still pending from 2019. Therefore, directions

3 wp6064.19.odt

can be given to the learned Member, Industrial Court, Amravati

for deciding the matter expeditiously and within a period of six

months from the date of receipt of this order.

6. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of

without interfering in the impugned order dated 06.08.2019

below Exh.U-2. Learned Member, Industrial Court is directed to

decide Complaint ULP No.69/2019 within a period of six months

from the date of receipt of this order. It is expected that both the

parties will extend their full cooperation for expeditious disposal

of the matter.

Rule accordingly. No order as to costs.

JUDGE

kahale