1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR C.A.W. NO. 8181/2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5391/2007 Mah. State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. and others vs. Hon'ble Member, Industrial Court and another - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- CORAM : S.R.DONGAONKAR, J. DATE : 27 th FEBRUARY, 2009 Heard Shri R.K.Deshpande, Advocate, for the Petitioner and Shri Mohokar, Advocate, for Respondent No.2/applicant. Learned A.G.P. present for respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 is claiming vacation of the interim order which was granted in the petition. It is the first submission of Respondent no.2/ applicant that the stay was granted without hearing to the respondent no.2/applicant. As regards this contention, suffice it to say that the stay was granted on hearing the petitioner in view of the fact that the impugned order was fit for reconsideration. The learned counsel for respondent no.2 has submitted that in the affidavit of the petitioners, there is nothing to suggest as to why the present respondent no.2 was found not eligible . According to him, the Industrial Court 2 has rightly held that the order to withdraw his deemed date was discriminatory. The submission made by the respondent no.2 in this regard is the subject matter of the petition and therefore, that cannot be considered at this stage. Accordingly the application is rejected. However, petition is directed to be expeditiously heard. List the petition on 21st March, 2009, for final hearing. Application disposed of. JUDGE Rvjalit