1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL ST.NO.9695 OF 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7196 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.227 OF 2007 Smt.Sunitidevi Singhania Hospital & Medical Research Centre .. Applicant. Versus Shramik Sena .. Respondent. Mr.Carl Tamboly i/by J. Sagar Associates for the applicant. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & J.P. DEVADHAR, J. J.P. DEVADHAR, J. J.P. DEVADHAR, J. DATED : 12th February, 2008 DATED : 12th February, 2008 DATED : 12th February, 2008 P.C. : 1. Despite service nobody present on behalf of the respondent. The petitioner hospital had raised challenge to the order dated 2-8-2006 passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The principal plea taken in the writ petition was with regard to the fact that subsequent proceedings are barred by the principles of res judicata and as such the reference should be quashed and no proceedings should be taken in furtherance to the said reference. However, the learned Single Judge vide order dated 4-12-2006 dismissed the writ petition and observed that the petitioner had liberty to take up the issue before the competent forum and also that the observations made by the Industrial Tribunal in the impugned order cannot come in the way of the Industrial 2 Tribunal, while deciding the issue of applicability of the provisions of law comprised under Section 59 of the Act. 2. There is no reason for us to interfere in the order passed by the learned Single Judge in asmuch as it does not decide any issue on merits and merely relegated the petitioner to raise appropriate objection before the competent forum (Industrial Tribunal). According to the counsel appearing for the petitioner, the objection with regard to res judicata would put an end to proceedings, as such this Court should interfere. We are unable to accept this contention, however we dispose of this petition with further direction that the Industrial Court in the pending proceedings would examine the objection raised by the petitioner with regard to maintainability of the proceedings on the ground of res judicata at the very first instance. 3. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs. 4. As the appeal is disposed of, nothing further survives in the civil application. The same is disposed of with no order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE 3 J.P. DEVADHAR, J.