CLIFFORD REBELLO Vs. HOTEL OBEROI TOWERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is moved by the petitioner against the interim order passed by the 9th Labour Court, Mumbai, dated 1.6.2001, in Complaint (ULP) No. 212 of 2000. The complaint itself is under the provisions of the MRTU & PULP Act. 1971 and by the interim application the petitioner had prayed for stay of termination order of reinstatement on temporary basis of the respondent No. 1.

(2.) Heard both sides. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has come to this Court in writ petition by passing the alternative remedy, which was available to him under Sec. 44 of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The reasons given for this aspect vide para 27 of the petition are not convincing enough to give any second thought to the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that the petition should be entertained by this Court in its writ jurisdiction. The Learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 also sought to rely upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Engineers Employees' Union Vs. Devidayal Rolling and Refineries (Pvt.) Ltd. reported in 1986 I LLN 307 , wherein it is clearly ruled that the challenge to award of Labour Court before the High Court cannot be entertained when the alternative and equally efficacious P.C.remedy by way of revision under Sec. 44 of the said Act is available. It is further observed that it is not proper exercise of discretion by High Court to entertain a writ petition under Art. 227 of the constitution of India. I fully subscribe with this view and hold that it would not be proper for this Court to give any indulgence to the petitioner who has sought to bypass the remedy available to him under Sec. 44 of the Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner on this point submitted that, if this Court is of the said view, then the petition should be disposed of with direction to the Labour Court to hear the matter expeditiously within fixed time frame. In my considered view, direction to hear the matter expeditiously can be given especially in view of the facts and circumstances involved in this case.

(3.) Hence the petition stands disposed of. The learned Presiding Officer of the 9th Labour Court is directed to expedite the hearing of the Complaint (ULP) No. 212 of 2000 so as to dispose it of effectively within a period of 9 months from the date of this order. Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate of this Court.