RICHARDSON & CRUDDOS (1972) LTD Vs. MAHADEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent filed a complaint on 19-12-1983 under Sections 9. 28, 30 read with Sections 26, 27 and under Items 3, 5- 7 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), before the Industrial Court. Nagpur vide Complaint No. 270 of 1983 seeking declaration that the petitioner has engaged in and is still engaging in unfair labour practices complained of and for reliefs directing the petitioner to cease and desist from engaging in these unfair labour practices and also directing him to withdraw temporarily during the pendency of these proceedings and also finally the impugned office order dated 16-12-1983 and not to harass or humiliate the respondent in any manner whatsoever. He also filed an application under S. 30 (2) of the Act for interim relief directing the petitioner not to force the complainant to go to galvanising shop as a semi-skilled worker during the pendency of these proceedings on the very same date. Ex parte interim relief as prayed for was granted to the petitioner (respondent ?) on 19-12-1983.

(2.) The petitioner then filed an application for vacating the interim stay granted on 19-12-1983 vide his application dated 21-12- 1983. The Industrial Court vide order dated 22-12-1983 rejected the application of the petitioner and made the interim relief granted on 19-12-1983 absolute till the disposal of the complaint. This order is now challenged in this writ petition by the petitioner.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondent Shri Thakur contended that the impugned order being interlocutory, this Court cannot interfere with it while exercising jurisdiction under Art. 227 of the Constitution. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court is quite competent for exercising the said jurisdiction once it finds that such order suffers from patent errors or erroneous exercise of jurisdiction resulting in miscarriage of justice. Shri Palshikar relied upon the decision of this Court reported in Mazdoor Congress V/s. S. R. Shinde.,1983 MhLJ 909para 11 at p. 919) which states that