1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5414 OF 2009 (Bhandara District Central Coop. Bank Ltd. & Anr. vs. The Member, IC, & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. APRIL 08, 2010. None for the petitioners. Shri Adgokar, learned AGP for respondent No.1 and Shri Jaiswal, learned counsel for respondent No. 2. Shri Jaiswal, learned counsel was heard yesterday. He has also placed on record the brief notes of arguments along with various judgments. His contention is, the stand that the employer wants to prove misconduct before Labour Court, needs to be taken at the earliest possible opportunity i.e. while filing written statement. He relies upon Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation vs. Lakshmidevamma, reported at 2001 II L.L.J. 199. He has also pointed out that in the identical circumstances, in Writ Petition No. 2039 of 2001 (Wasudeo Mahadeo Tandekar vs. Member, Industrial Court & Anr.), the learned Single Judge has on 27.07.2001 followed the said Constitution Bench judgment and has not permitted 2 amendment to written statement. The perusal of judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Constitution Bench reveals that there, the earlier judgment in the case of Shambhu Nath Goyal has been followed and while appreciating it, the principle of stare decisis has also been adopted and law holding the field for last about 17 years then, was found valid. The earliest possible opportunity available to the employer is held to be the time when the employer files written statement after getting knowledge of grievance of the employee in his application or complaint. The same view is taken in Writ Petition No. 2039 of 2001 (supra). Here, admittedly in written statement filed in Complaint ULPA No. 158 of 1994, there is no plea by the employer and liberty to prove misconduct has not been reserved. The complaint as filed is dated 29.08.1994 and application for amendment is filed long thereafter. According to Shri Jaiswal, learned counsel, written statement is filed on 03.05.1995 and amendment is sought in the year 2003. However, papers before this Court do not carry copy of written statement and there is no date on application for amendment. The facts clearly show that the employer – petitioners did not reserve leave to prove misconduct at the earliest possible opportunity and amendment is sought long thereafter. The preliminary issue has been decided by the Labour Court, Bhandara, on 14.11.2007 holding inquiry to be vitiated. 3 In view of the law discussed above, it is apparent that no case is made out warranting any interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.