Bombay High CourtWP/11360/2014disposed offdismissed for default

Auto Cars Employees Union C/O Netragaonkars Wada, Aurangabad v. Auto Cars, 14km Stone, Aurangabad

2016-03-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge5 pages

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.11360/2014 Auto Cars Employees Union, Aurangabad. Through President.

...Petitioner..

Versus

M/s Auto Cars, Chitegaon, Aurangabad. Through Partners.

...Respondent...

.....

Shri T.K. Prabhakaran a/w Shri G.S. Telangre, Advocates for petitioner.

Shri Ashok Patil a/w Shri B.R. Kawre, Advocates for respondent.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= WRIT PEETITION NO.10738/2015 M/s Auto Cars, Through its Authorized Signatory.

...Petitioner..

Versus

Videocon Group Employees Union, Through its President & others.

...Respondents..

.....

Shri Ashok Patil a/w Shri B.R. Kawre, Advocates for petitioner.

Shri T.K. Prabhakaran a/w Shri G.S. Telangre, Advocates for respondents.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

- 2 - WRIT PETITION NO.11807/2015 M/s Auto Cars, Through its Authorized Signatory.

...Petitioner..

Versus

Videocon Group Employees Union, Through its President Gajanan Khandare.

...Respondent..

.....

Shri Ashok Patil a/w Shri B.R. Kawre, Advocates for petitioner.

Shri T.K. Prabhakaran a/w Shri G.S. Telangre, Advocates for respondent.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATE: 18.03.2016 ORDER :

1] I have heard the learned Advocates for the management and the Union / workers for quite some time. 2] In two petitions, the management is before this Court as against an interlocutory order passed by the Industrial Court, Aurangabad, u/s 30(2) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. In one matter, the

- 3 - Union is before this Court also challenging an interlocutory order passed by the Industrial Court u/s 30(2).

3] After hearing the strenuous submissions of the learned Advocates for the respective sides and after going through the petition paper-books with their assistance, it is apparent that highly contentious and disputed issues have been raised by both the sides. The complaints filed before the Industrial Court were lodged in 2014. After the interim orders have been passed, the litigating sides are before this Court.

4] The learned Advocates for the respective sides do not dispute that an adjudication of the complaints would eventually result in adjudicating upon the rights of the respective sides.

5] Considering the conspectus of the matter, I am of the view that it would be in the interest of justice and in the interest of the litigating sides that the complaints before the Industrial Court are decided finally.

5] There appears to be a consensus between the parties, though Shri Prabhakaran desired a shorter period

- 4 - for the adjudication of the complaints, that a duration of about 8 to 10 months would be sufficient for the litigating sides to render their assistance to the Industrial Court, Aurangabad, and have the five complaints i.e. Complaint (ULP) Nos.148/2013, 149/2013, 160/2013, 49/2014 and 286/2015, decided.

7] In the light of the above, these petitions are disposed of with the direction to the Industrial Court, Aurangabad, to endeavour to decide the above mentioned five complaints as expeditiously as possible and preferably on or before the 31st day of January, 2017. 8] The Industrial Court may endeavour to cast the issues in these five complaints, considering the respective pleadings of the parties and with the assistance of the learned Advocates, preferably on or before the 16th day of April, 2016.

9] The learned Advocates for the litigating sides assure that they would refrain from seeking adjournment on unreasonable or trivial grounds and would render their assistance to the Industrial Court for the adjudication of these complaints within the time frame.

10] Needless to state, considering the anxiety

- 5 - expressed by the learned Advocates for the litigating sides, the pendency of the complaints before the Industrial Court and the direction of this Court expediting the adjudication of the said five complaints, shall not be an impediment to the litigating sides to arrive at an amicable settlement. They may even take recourse to the machinery provided under the Industrial Disputes Act for the resolution of their grievances, which would always be in the interest of the industry and the management as well as the employees.

(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) ndk/c1831617.doc