-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.2528 of 2007 Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. ..Petitioner vs. 1. Shri Kacharu Nathu Yadav and others ..Respondents with Writ Petition No.163 of 2008 Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. ..Petitioner vs. Mariappa Laxman Jagali and ors. ..Respondents Mr.J.P.Cama, Sr.Counsel with Mr.G.D.Talreja for petitioner Mr.S.N.Deshpande for respondent nos.16 to 46 Mr.R.D.Suvarna for respondent no.48 Mr.Jaiprakash Sawant for respondent No.65 to 87 Ms.R.Todankar for respdt.no.52 in W.P.No.2528 of 2007 and R.No.89 in W.P.No.163 of 2008. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. J. J. 3rd July 2008 3rd July 2008 3rd July 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. These two writ petitions which are placed before me for orders are challenging the Controlling Authority’s common order dated 31st October, 2007. The common order, copy of which is annexed to the writ petitions is on the application requesting the Controlling Authority to take cognisance of the preliminary objection raised by the -2- petitioners who are opposite party no.1 before the Controlling Authority. The request was that some of the points/objections would conclude the matter finally as they go to the root of the case. 2. When these matters were placed before me after the notices were issued earlier, I called upon the parties to ascertain as to whether the Controlling Authority has framed the issues arising for its determination. In all fairness Mr.Cama, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Deshpande appearing for the concerned workmen state that the issues have not been framed. 3. Thereafter, I requested both of them to hand over to me the draft of the issues which could be settled in this Court itself so that the petitioners can make proper application requesting the Controlling Authority to treat some of them as preliminary issues and decide them accordingly. They may make a request to take them up for consideration before the issues on merits are gone into and adjudicated. Equally, the workmen can point out that these issues would require going into factual aspects. In other words, they are issues of facts and law and not purely of law and, therefore, request to treat them as preliminary issue be not accepted. All the issues be -3- taken up together. 4. From the order passed by the Controlling Authority and impugned in this petition, it does not appear to me that there is any application of mind to these pleas and the contentions which have been urged before me. In such circumstances, these writ petitions can be disposed of by following order. 5. By consent of parties, the draft issues tendered before me shall be the issues framed for consideration of the Controlling Authority. If any additional issues arise for determination in the light of the pleadings, then, this order does not prevent the Controlling Authority from framing them and include the same as " Issues." 6. As the issues are framed, the petitioners are at liberty to apply to the Controlling Authority for taking and treating some of the issues as preliminary issues and they be considered before the matter is heard on merits. It would be open for the workers to point out that these are not preliminary issues and cannot be treated as such and, therefore, all issues as framed should be decided together. All pleas in that behalf are kept open for being urged by both sides. This Court has not directed -4- treating of any of the issues as preliminary issues and merely because the impugned order is quashed and set aside does not mean that any opinion is expressed by this Court on rival contentions on this aspect as well as on merits. 7. Considering the fact that there are 180 workmen who had approached the Controlling Authority and their claims are for gratuity, the Controlling Authority should endeavour and dispose of the matters as expeditiously as possible and within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 8. It would be open for the Controlling Authority to treat these issues as common issues in all cases and if necessary it can frame separate issues considering the pleadings therein. The parties can request adopting of the issues in the matters which are covered by these writ petitions and pleas in that behalf are kept open. The petitions are disposed of in the above terms. The orders impugned in the petitions stand quashed and set aside and substituted as above. 9. At the request of Mr.Cama the names of respondent nos. 37 to 47 in writ petition no.163 of 2008 stand deleted at the risk of the petitioner. -5- (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)