WARANA SAHAKARI KARKHANA LTD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Returnable forthwith.

(2.) RESPONDENT Nos. 6 to 10 filed dispute against the petitioners in the co-operative Court No. I, Kolhapur. Pending the dispute an application was filed for interim relief. The Co-operative Court rejected the said application by its detail speaking order dated 22nd February, 1989. This dismissal was challenged by the original disputants in Appeal No. 44 of 1989. Appellate court partly allowed the appeal restraining the Karkhana from acting upon and operating resolutions passed after 30th June, 1981 until final disposal of the dispute. Hence this petition.

(3.) MR. Naik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is justified in contending that the Appellate Court should not have interfered with the order passed by the Trial Court. Going through the order of the trial court we find good reasons in support thereof. Moreover, the Appellate court was also conscious of the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in Rahuri Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited v. State of Maharashtra [air 1987 Bom 248 : 1987 C. T. J. 378]. It is unfortunate that despite these observations and findings of the Division Bench, the Appellate court should have interfered with the Trial Court's order. Again, in matters such as this which have direct nexus with election and/or the election processes likely to be set in motion, drastic orders of injunction which thwart or obstruct the election processes should not be made unless, objectively, a very strong case is made out and unless very exceptional circumstances warrant such action. Our experience, albeit limited to the last few weeks, indicate that almost every other sugar Karkhana in this part of the State is rivan with political dissensions. There has been more of politics than law in quite a few such Karkhana matters coming before us with a times extraneous considerations hovering over the decision making process either at the executive level and/or the Karkhana level.