1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6029 OF 2005 General Kamgar Union (Red Flag) ..Petitioner. Vs. Mulla & Mulla Craigie Blunt & Caroe & Ors. ..Respondents. .... Ms.N.D.Buch with Ms.Bina Dholkia for the Petitioner. Mr.R.S.Pai with Ms.Sushma Joshi i/b M/s.Haresh Mehta & Co. for Respondent No.1. Mr.J.P.Cama, Senior Advocate i/b M/s.Sanjay Udeshi & Co. for Respondent No.2. .... CORAM : CORAM : CORAM : F.I.REBELLO & F.I.REBELLO & F.I.REBELLO & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, JJ. JJ. JJ. 29th September, 2005. P.C. : 2 1. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 30th March , 2005 passed below Exh.U/2 in Application (MRTU) 17 of 2004. By the said order the Industrial Court was pleased to reject the application for interim relief as prayed for by the Petitioner. Application (MRTU) 17 of 2004 is by the Petitioner herein seeking a relief for cancellation of the status of recognition of Respondent No.2. That issue is at large before the Industrial Court. 2. From what has been argued at the bar it is clear that after the period of settlement has come to an end, there has been no further deduction made. We further make it clear that if after April 2005 any demand is made by Respondent No.2 on Respondent No.1 claiming deductions, then Respondent No.1 in respect of such demands will keep the amount in a separate account which will be subject to the final order which will be passed in Application (MRTU) 17 of 2004 which is pending before the Industrial Court. 3. Considering the controversy involved, ends 3 of justice will be met if the Industrial Court is directed to dispose of the complaint before 31st March, 2006. Counsel for the parties agree that they will co-operate with the Industrial Court in disposal of the complaint and will not ask for unnecessary adjournment. With the above directions, the Petition stands disposed of. (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.)