M/S. Sahara India Tv Network And ANR v. Mr. Yashwant Dhaku Rathod And ORS

Shridhar Sutar 1 25-wp-2725-16.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2725 OF 2016 M/s Sahara India TV Network and another ... Petitioners

Versus

Yashwant Dhaku Rathod and others ... Respondents .....

Mr. Akhil Gurwada i/b Mr. Dujendrakumar Sharma for the Petitioners.

Mr. Kamlesh Mishra a/w Mr. Praveen Tiwadi i/b Uvaank Juris for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

.....

CORAM

: M. S. KARNIK, J.

DATE : 25th MARCH, 2019.

P. C.:

1.

Leave to amend to delete respondent No.3. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

2.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard learned Counsel for the parties by consent, finally.

3.

The petitioner M/s. Sahara India TV Network has filed this writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 10th July, 2014 passed by the Member, Industrial Court, Mumbai in Complaint (ULP) No.116 of 2014 filed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

Shridhar Sutar 2 25-wp-2725-16.doc 4.

By impugned order the company was directed to allow the workmen to join duty and pay their wages, TA/DA due and payable. This Court vide order dated 21/09/2016 issued notice to the respondents and in the meantime granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clauses (b) and (c) . Learned Counsel for the petitioner raised several issues including the territorial jurisdiction of the Industrial Court to decide the complaint. 5.

I find that the complaint of unfair labour practice is of the year 2014. Even, the interim order was passed by this Court on 21/09/2016. In this view of the matter, the main complaint which is of the year 2014 can itself be directed to be decided expeditiously. The Industrial Court is therefore directed to decide Complaint (ULP) No.116 of 2014 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of nine months from today. 6.

The parties undertake to cooperate for expeditious disposal of the complaint. They further undertake not to seek unnecessary adjournments. The interim order which is operating since September 2016 is continued till disposal of the Complaint (ULP) No. 116 of 2014.

Shridhar Sutar 3 25-wp-2725-16.doc 7.

The writ petition is disposed of. Rule is made partly absolute in above terms.

8.

Needless to mention that all contentions of either parties on merits are kept open.

( M. S. KARNIK, J. )