1 WP 8677.2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8677 OF 2011 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders .......................... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 23/11/2011. Mr. V.D.Hon, Advocate for the Petitioners. ......................... PER COURT : 1. The present petitioners impugn the order passed by the Industrial Court, thereby partly allowing the Complaint filed by the respondent. Vide the said impugned order, the present petitioners are restrained from recovering the amount of Rs. 50,000/- as ordered by the Accident Enquiry Committee and the present petitioners are further directed to refund the amount, if any, recovered so far from the present respondent. 2. Mr. Hon, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the rash and negligent act of t he respondent caused accident, due to which the petitioners had to sustain loss of Rs. 50,000/-. According to the learned counsel, the 2 WP 8677.2011 petitioners have not indulged in any unfair labour practice. An opportunity of hearing was given to the present respondent and thereafter the order was passed seeking recovery. Even the respondent was asked to remain present in the meeting. The principles of natural justice were followed. The document Exh. C-36 has not been taken into consideration by the Industrial Court. Due procedure as contemplated in Rule 4 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad [ Discipline and Appeal ] Rules, 1994 [ For short, ‘ said Rules ’ ] are followed. But, the Industrial Court has failed to consider these aspects. 3. With the assistance of the learned counsel, I have gone through the order. 4. The Industrial Court has considered Rule 4 of the said Rules. It has been considered that the order of the recovery falls under minor penalty No. 3 and the said order is in the nature of the minor penalty. It has also been observed that the penalty can not be imposed unless the procedure as contemplated in Rule 7 of the said Rules is followed i.e. the enquiry is required to be held and thereafter finding is to be recorded on imputation of misconduct and mis-behaviour. It has been observed that no such procedure has been followed. The Industrial Court has not committed any error while passing the Judgment. 3 WP 8677.2011 5. In light of the above, the Writ Petition being sans merit, is dismissed. No costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J. ] KNP/WP 8677.2011