-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 867 of 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2650 OF 2006 M/s.Hindustan Lever Ltd. ....... Appellant. Versus Industrial Perfumes Workers’ Union and others... .. .... Respondents. Mr. P.K.Rele, Senior Counsel with Mr. R.N.Shah i/by M/s.Sanjay Udeshi & Co., for the Appellant. Mr. Kiran Bapat with Mr. Bennet D’Costa for the Respondents. CORAM : R. M. LODHA, and CORAM : R. M. LODHA, and CORAM : R. M. LODHA, and S. A. BOBDE, JJ. S. A. BOBDE, JJ. S. A. BOBDE, JJ. DATED : 11TH DECEMBER, 2006. DATED : 11TH DECEMBER, 2006. DATED : 11TH DECEMBER, 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: We heard Mr. P. K. Rele, Senior Counsel, for the appellant. 2. The Industrial Court by its order dated 29th August, 2006 allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing complaint by the respondents. The said order was challenged by the appellant in extra -: 2 :- ordinary jurisdiction of this Court. The learned Single Judge found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed the same. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal has been preferred. 3. Mr. P. K. Rele, Senior Counsel, urged that the impugned order condoning the delay in filing the complaint does not record any reason justifying the condonation of delay. 4. In the application for condonation of delay, the respondents herein, set out the cause that the complainant no.2 was paid gratuity by the appellant on 16th March, 2004 and being retired person he was not in a position to run around for filing a complaint, he kept on requesting the present appellant to settle his dues and also addressed a letter on 26th July 2004 for that purpose but that was not acceded to. Then with the help of the Union, the present complaint was filed. The afore stated reason found favour with the Industrial Court in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and another v/s Mst. Katiji and Others, 1987 (II) CLR 92. In our considered view, the consideration of the application for condonation of -: 3 :- delay by the Industrial Court cannot be said to suffer from any legal flow justifying interference in extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court. The learned Single Judge, accordingly, cannot be said to have erred in rejecting the petition. No case for interference is made out. 5. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Sd/- (R. M. LODHA, J.) (R. M. LODHA, J.) (R. M. LODHA, J.) Sd/- (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.)