HINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED Vs. ASHOK VISHNU KATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) By consent of learned advocates of the parties, the appeal is finally heard and is being disposed of by this judgment.

(3.) The short question involved in this appeal centres round the jurisdiction of the Labour Court functioning under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) regarding entertaining of complaints filed under Section 28(1) of the Maharashtra Act in connection with contemplated discharge or dismissal of the employees alleged to be resorted to by the employer by way of unfair labour practice, as mentioned in Item 1 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Act. The Labour Court in which the complaints were filed took the view that such complaints were not maintainable as the actual orders of discharge or dismissal were yet not passed by the employer. The learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court confirmed that view, but the appellate Bench of the High Court allowed the writ appeal filed by the respondent-workmen and took a contrary view. That is how the employer is before us in this appeal BACKGROUND FACTS