IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4121 OF 2007 Barku M. Kadam & Ors... ...... ....Petitioners. V/s M/s.Rekord Management ...... ....Respondent. Mr.T.R.Yadav, Adv. For the petitioners. Smt.A.P.Purav, Adv. For respondent Nos. 1 & 2. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 2/8/07 PC: Rejection of complaint filed under MRTU & PULP Act by the present petitioners has given rise to filing of the present writ petition. Admittedly the petitioners were working with the respondent. However the respondent has effected closure after complying with the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. The case of the petitioner before the Industrial Court is that the closure is illegal. However the Industrial Court has observed that barring the petitioners all other employees have accepted the dues and the industry is presently being run by one Mr.Panchal and not the present respondent. On appreciation of evidence on record the Industrial Court found that the respondent has not indulged in unfair labour practice. Perused the judgment and order passed by the Industrial Court. It goes to take possible view of the matter which does not call for interference in writ jurisdiction. Hence writ petition is summarily dismissed. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner points out that though legal dues were offered to the petitioners by cheque the petitioners have not encashed the cheques. Learned counsel for the respondent shows readiness and willingness of the respondent to pay amount of dues to the petitioners within period of two weeks from today.