1 W.P.No.9457.09 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9457 OF 2009 Neel B. Dalal ... Petitioner v/s Dhondiba B. Nipane ... Respondent Mr.Ashwin Shete and Aditya Mithe i/by M/s.Khaitan & Jayakar for the petitioner. None present for the respondent. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 7TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 P.C.: 1. The petition has been filed contending that the order passed by the Labour Court is perverse. By the impugned order, the Labour Court has decided that all issues should be heard together. The petitioner had contended that the issues as to whether the respondent is a workman and whether the petitioner is running an industry, should be framed and tried as preliminary issues. In my opinion, the Labour Court has committed no error by concluding that all issues should be 2 W.P.No.9457.09 tried together by relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of D.P.Maheshwari v/s Delhi Administration & ors., reported in 1983 Lab.I.C. 1629. The reference is of the year 2002. The impugned order has been passed in 2008. The petitioner has filed a review application although the review is not maintainable. That application was disposed of in September, 2009. The petition has been filed in November, 2009. However, it appears from the record that no steps have been taken by the petitioner to have the petition moved expeditiously. 2. In my opinion, the order of the Labour Court is not perverse requiring interference by this Court. 3. Writ petition rejected. ..... 3 W.P.No.9457.09