1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO: 815/2008 (Mrs. Anuradha w/o Damodar Naik vs. Nagpur DCC Bank ) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders. .................................................................................................................................................................. Mr. Marpakwar Adv. for petitioner CORAM: A.H.JOSHI , J. DATED: 11th March, 2008. *** Admittedly, the petitioner was removed from employment by way of dismissal against which she preferred Mercy Appeal. In the Mercy Appeal, she was ordered lesser punishment which, according to her, was permissible as per Rules. She, therefore, did not accept the order dated 18th March 1993 passed in Mercy Appeal. 2. She preferred Dispute challenging the initial order of dismissal as well as challenging the order passed in Mercy Appeal. 3. The present Writ Petition arises out of the judgment delivered by the Industrial Court, Nagpur dismissing petitioner's complaint alleging that the decision rendered in the Mercy Appeal was by way of unfair labour practice. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner's complaint, against the order of dismissal is pending adjudication at the stage of condonation of delay. The petitioner has lost 2 on that point and learned single Judge of this Court by allowing Writ Petition condoned the delay caused in filing of complaint against the order of dismissal. According to petitioner, Letters Patent Appeal filed by the employer against the judgment of this Court rendered in Writ Petition No.4436/2004 dated 5th August 2005 is pending. 5. Since the main challenge is pending which was due and significant ground for the Industrial Court to have declined to interfere. Moreover, the punishment imposed in the Mercy Appeal cannot be regarded as unfair labour practice. On this ground, this Court finds that the petition has no merits. 6. No interference is called for. Writ Petition is dismissed. JUDGE sahare