Maharashtra Rajya Mathadi And Gumasta v. The State Of Maharashtra And 3 ORS

9. wp 2785-19.doc DDR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2785 OF 2019 Maharashtra Rajya Mathadi and Gumasta General Kamgar Sanghtana ..Petitioner vs.

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

..Respondents ...........

Dr. Uday Warunjikar a/w. Mr. Siddhesh Pilankar for petitioner. Mr. Kedar Dighe, AGP for respondents.

...........

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & M.S.KARNIK, JJ.

DATE : 20 FEBRUARY 2020 P.C.:- Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The Petitioner has made following averments in this Petition:

"7.

The Petitioner submits that however in the proceedings before the deputy commissioner of Labour, on 29th March, 2019, representative of the said company was present. Rojnama maintained by the said deputy commissioner of Labour goes to show that the representative of the said company admitted that there were three contractors and 80 employees appointed through contractor by the said Company. The copy of the said Rojnama is annexed herewith and marked as Exhibit - D. 1/2

9. wp 2785-19.doc 8.

However, the Petitioner submits that no action is initiated by the respondent. Therefore, on 19th of June 2019, representation was made by the present petitioner through advocate. The same was received by the respondent on 21st June, 2019. The copy of the said notice is annexed herewith and marked as Exhibit - E."

The grievance of the Petitioner as narrated above is that the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour have been left halfway and have not been taken to logical end. 3.

The Additional Government Pleader, on instructions, states that there are certain reasons why the proceedings could not be taken further. He states that the communication in that regard giving reasons for leaving the proceedings incomplete will be addressed to the Petitioner within a period of 3 weeks. After such communication is received, it is open to the Petitioner to take necessary steps. If it is the stand of the Respondents that the proceedings were going on before the authority which had no power to do so, the communication will guide the Petitioner as to which is the proper authority where the Petitioner's grievance can be heard or decided.

4.

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (M.S.KARNIK, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.) 2/2 Digitally signed by Diksha Rane Date:

2020.02.25 11:39:58 +0530 Diksha Rane