ROHIT DEMBIWAL Vs. TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Gavade, learned Advocate for Petitioner and Mr. Telkar, learned Advocate for Respondents.

(2.) This Writ Petition is filed under the provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the judgment dtd. 4/9/2021 passed by the learned Industrial Court, Mumbai in Revision Application (ULP) No.10 of 2021 under Sec. 44 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short 'MRTU and PULP Act').

(3.) Petitioner filed Revision Application under Sec. 44 of the MRTU and PULP Act to challenge the judgment and order passed by the learned Judge Third Labour Court Mumbai in Complaint (ULP) No.283 of 2015 dtd. 11/1/2021 by which the Complaint filed by Petitioner was dismissed holding that Petitioner is not a 'workman' as defined under Sec. 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'ID Act') and consequently an 'employee' within the meaning of Sec. 3(5) of the MRTU and PULP Act. By the said judgment the learned Labour Court further held that it did not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaint.