1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4652 OF 2010 Linesh Chandrakant Satope ... Petitioner v/s M/s.Golden Liquor Agencies ... Respondent Mr.V.P.Vaidya for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Gehani for respondent Nos.1 & 2. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 6TH JULY, 2010 P.C.: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. 2. The petitioner challenges the order passed by the Labour Court on 12.3.2010. This order has been passed below Exh. U-4 which is an application for production of certain documents. The documents sought from the respondent are as follows :- 1. Registration Certificate under the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. 2. Muster roll-cum-wage register for the period from 1997 to 2007. 2 3. Register of employment. 4. Leave book. 5. Register of Bonus. 6. Register showing the details of payment made towards incentive and commission. 7. Partnership Deed registers with the Registrar of Partnership. 2. The respondents have opposed this application by contending that the documents are not relevant. The Labour Court has dismissed the application mainly on the ground that the documents sought pertain to matters which fall within the scope of Schedule III of the Industrial Disputes Act (in short, “the I.D.Act”) triable by the Industrial Tribunal and, therefore, the application cannot be allowed by the Labour Court under Section 33-C(2) of the I.D. Act. The Labour Court, while considering whether the respondents should be directed to produce muster roll-cum-wage register for the period from 1997 to 2007, has observed that, under Section 20(10) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, records pertaining to the muster-wage register, etc. are required to be maintained only for a period of two years. Therefore, these records would not be available with the respondents. 3. In my opinion, the reasons for rejecting the application which have been mentioned in the impugned order are 3 incorrect. An adjudication relating to the demand for bonus or wages do fall within the scope of Schedule III of the I.D. Act. When the amounts are sought by the workmen under Section 33-C(2) of the I.D. Act, the Labour Court would only have to see whether the documents sought by the petitioner are relevant for the purposes of effectively deciding the application filed under Section 33-C(2) of the I.D. Act. The order of the Labour Court indicates that it has considered issues which are not germane to the decision of the application. 4. Accordingly, the order impugned in the writ petition is set aside. 5. The Labour Court will decide the application at Exh.U-4 afresh. 6. Writ petition disposed of accordingly. .....