1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. APPEAL NO.125/2009 1] The Jain Sahakari Bank Limited, A Multi State Co-operative Bank, Registered under the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, having its Head Office at Hira Baug, Khattaralli Lane,C.P.Tank, Mumbai-400 004 APPELLANTS 2] Madhav Balkrishna Jambhekar, The Chief Executive Officer, The Jain Sahakari Bank Limited , having its Head Office at Hira Baug, Khattaralli Lane,C.P.Tank, Mumbai- 400 004 VS. Smt.Bharati Joshi, 8/2008,Kapasi Nivas Co-operative Housing Society Limited,Liliya Nagar, Goregaon(West),Mumbai-400 062 RESPONDENT Mr.P.M.Palshikar,A.P.P.for the Petitioner Mr.A.S.Peerzada,Advocate for Respondent CORAM: DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,J. & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J. 21st March,2009. 2 P.C. . Admit. Counsel for the Respondent waives service. By consent taken up for final hearing. 2] The learned Single Judge,while admitting a petition directed against an order passed under section 33 [C] [2] of The Industrial Disputes Act,1947, granted stay to the order of the Labour Court conditional on the petitioners depositing an amount of Rs.1,28,623/-. The amount is directed to be invested. However, in the concluding part of the directions the learned Single Judge observed as follows :- ''The pendency of this Writ Petition will not prevent the Respondent from taking any other proceedings for the purpose of recovery of the said amount.' ' 3] In so far as the first part of the directions requiring the petitioners to deposit the amount in question is concerned, no case has been made out for interference in Appeal with the exercise of discretion by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has secured the amount which has been awarded to the workman and has directed that the money should be invested in a Nationalised Bank. The order in that regard does not suffer from any infirmity. However,in the latter part of the order the learned Single Judge has granted liberty to the respondent to initiate proceedings for the recovery of the amount. One the amount is secured,the grant of such liberty for initiating proceedings for recovery was not warranted. The 3 learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has conceded that the latter part of the order would need to be vacated. 4] In the circumstances the appeal is disposed of by modifying the order of the learned Single Judge to the extent to which the learned Single Judge directed that the pendency of the petition shall not prevent the respondent from taking any other proceedings for the recovery of the amount. That part of the order shall stand vacated. However, it is clarified that in the event the petitioners fail to deposit the amount, the conditional stay which has been granted by the learned Single Judge shall stand automatically vacated leaving it open to the respondent to seek recourse to the remedy available for recovery of the dues. The appeal is disposed of. No costs. DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,J. MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.