1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Writ Petition No.507/2010 ( The Chief Executive Officer, Z.P., Bhandara & another -: versus :- Pundlik S/o Ganpat Kumble & another ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Ms M.P. Munshi, Adv. for petitioners. Mr. N.G. Salao, Adv. for respondent no.1. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : JULY 13, 2010. Heard finally. The respondent claim that he was appointed in 1989 as Farras and filed U.L.P.A. complaint challenging his termination. That complaint was dismissed and he then approached in Industrial Court in revision under section 44 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. That revision came to be allowed. The employer i.e. Zilla Parishad is before this Court challenging that order. Adv. Munshi has pointed out that before Labour Court the respondent contended that he was appointed by Block Development Officer but then did not produce any appointment order. In reply before this Court, the stand is that he was appointed by Headmaster of the school and a document dated 25th of January 1980 allegedly delegating powers of appointment to Headmaster is produced on record. According to her, this document and any appointment order issued by Headmaster was not produced before Labour Court. 2 Adv. Salao on the other hand contends that work done by respondent for about 14 years on daily wages is not in dispute and hence order passed by Labour Court needs to be reconsidered. It is apparent that the questions whether respondent entered the service validly and whether there was any relationship of employer and employee between parties arise. In so far as Zilla Parishad is concerned, it is Chief Executive Officer who is supposed to be the employer. The issue cannot be concluded either way at this stage as Labour Court has not recorded any findings about the issuance of appointment order to respondent or then about the authority which disbursed his salary. In that view of matter any further findings by this Court may prejudice the rights of either parties. Hence the impugned order dated 27/9/2007 passed by Labour Court, Bhandara in U.L.P. Complaint No.20/2003 and judgment dated 21/4/2008 delivered by Member Industrial Court, Bhandara in Revision (U.L.P.A) No.26/2008 is quashed and set aside. Proceedings in U.L.P.A. are restored back to the Labour Court for fresh decision in accordance with law. Parties are at liberty to file additional documents on record and the matter shall be decided as early as possible and in any case by 31st of March 2011. Parties to appear before Labour Court on 31st of July 2010 and abide by its further directions in the matter. Rule accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE Tambaskar.