I H MEHTA Vs. ASHOK BHARGAV JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage by consent of the parties.

(2.) Accordingly, the learned Judge, Labour Court seems to have applied his mind afresh and passed the order dated 4.11.2008 directing issuance of process against the present applicant and the employer Standard Industries Limited. The order dated 4.11.2008 was challenged by the applicant before the Industrial Court. The learned President of the Industrial Court dismissed the revision by his order dated 7.1.2011. Aggrieved thereby, the applicant is before this Court.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Counsel for the respondent /original complainant. The contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant that once the order directing issuance of process was set aside, it was not open for the learned Judge, Labour Court to again issue process, has to be rejected because it is not that the order was quashed or set aside by the learned Member, Industrial Court because it was meritless, but because the learned Member found that the matter required a fresh consideration. Therefore, it is not that upon the order being set aside, the learned Judge of the Labour Court was reviewing or recalling his own order. In any case, it is not that the learned Judge, Labour Court had initially refused to issue process against the applicant. It seems that he has been consistently holding that there was material to issue process against the applicant.