DILIP VITHALRAO JOGDAND Vs. VAIDYANATH URBAN CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order dated 15.4.2004 passed by Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad, in Miscellaneous (ULP) Application No. 10/2003, whereby learned Member was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay caused in submitting an application for restoration of a complaint, that was dismissed in default, is under challenge by present writ petition. Heard respective Counsel for respective parties.

(2.) Present petitioner had filed complaint under section 28(1) r/w Item Nos. 9 and 10 from Schedule-IV of MRTU & PULP Act, 1971, thereby challenging his suspension by Order dated 6.6.1997. This complaint was dismissed in default by the Industrial Court vide Order dated 13.8.1998. Application for restoration was filed only on 15.4.2004. However, the application did not enter hearing on merits, because the learned Member of the Industrial Court at Aurangabad, refused to condone the delay by impugned order.

(3.) This Court is apprised of other developments in the litigation between the parties by learned Counsel for respondents. Writ Petition No. 3394/1997 was filed by present petitioner thereby challenging refusal by Industrial Court interim relief in this very complaint under section 28. In that writ petition, this Court had granted ad-interim stay to suspension by order dated 23.10.1997. Respondents filed C.A. No. 1497/1998, which was disposed of by order dated 17.3.1998. Civil application was allowed and consequently ad interim relief was vacated thereby re-clamping suspension and making way clear for progress of disciplinary action, if any, against present petitioner. The Advocates are unaware of the stage of that suspension and disciplinary action as on today.