INDRA KUMAR PATEL Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the pregnability of the order passed by Presiding Officer, Industrial Court, Jabalpur in Case No. 40/mpir/2002, dated 19-12-2002 whereby it had set aside the order dated 5-10-2002 (Annexure P-2) passed by Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jabalpur in Case No. 129/2002 allowing the application of the petitioner under Section 107 of the M. P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (in short 'the Act' ).

(2.) NO exhaustive statement of facts are necessary for the disposal of this writ petition. Suffice it to say that the petitioner who is an employee has invoked industrial jurisdiction of Labour Court by filing an application under Section 31 (3) of the Act challenging his transfer order dated 9-7-2002 (Annexure P-l) whereby he was transferred from Jabalpur to Haldia. An interim application under Section 107 of the Act was also filed and it was prayed therein that till the decision of the main application filed under the Act, operation of transfer order (Annexure P-l) be stayed. Labour Court vide order dated 5-10-2002 (Annexure P-2) stayed the operation of the transfer order. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the respondents herein preferred an application under Section 67 of the Act before the Industrial Court who vide impugned order (Annexure P-5) allowed it and set aside the order of Labour Court. Hence this petition.

(3.) IN this petition, Shri Sameer Beohar, learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Industrial Court exceeded in its jurisdiction while setting aside the order passed by the Labour Court which was interim in nature and hence the order passed by the Industrial Court be set aside. His further contention is that the Labour Court was in its wisdom to decide the application because discretion vests in it and after exercising the discretion, the Labour Court passed the order staying his transfer order. In support of his contention, learned Counsel has placed heavy reliance on the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Navalkishore Narayan Bhargava v. Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation, Indore and another, 1975 MPLJ 251.