-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8305 OF 2003 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1488 OF 2008 M/s. Sudarshan Synthetics (Bombay) Pvt.Ltd. And ors. ... Petitioners versus Abdul Mabud and ors. ...Respondents Mr. K.S. Bapat for the petitioners. Ms. Seema Chopda for the first respondent. CORAM: P.B. MAJMUDAR, J. DATE: JULY 17, 2008. P.C. This petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order passed by the Fourth Labour Court, Thane in Complaint (ULP) No. 551 of 1997 which is confirmed by the revisional Court in Revision Application (ULP) No. 119 of 2003. The said orders are at Exhibits-F and G to the petition. 2. The respondent has challenged his termination order before the Labour Court. The Labour Court allowed the complaint by holding that the management has committed unfair labour practices and passed an order of reinstatement and back wages in favour of the respondent which order was confirmed by the revisional Court. -2- 3. The petitioner has also filed a Civil Application claiming certain legal dues. During the course of hearing, the parties have settled the dispute and have filed the consent terms. On behalf of the petitioners, the Manager of the Company is present and Mr. Bapat, learned Counsel for the petitioner has identified the Manager. Respondent is present in Court. On behalf of the respondent, Ms. Seema Chopda, learned counsel, has identified him. The consent terms are also signed by the parties and their advocates . Consent terms are taken on record and marked “X” for identification. In this view of the matter, the orders of the Labour Court as well as the revisional Court are set aside. Writ petition is disposed of in terms of the consent terms. Parties to abide by the terms contained in the consent terms. 4. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, no orders are required to be passed in Civil Application. Civil Application No. 1488 of 2008 is accordingly disposed of. P.B. MAJMUDAR, J.