1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 884 OF 2010 (Nagar Parishad, Chandur Bazar vs. Chhatrapati Damadu Kataktalware & 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 15, 2010. Heard finally Shri Saboo, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rupnarayan, learned counsel for respondent No.1 – caveator. The Industrial Court has rejected the prayer for amendment to written statement moved by the petitioner – employer on the ground that the trial has already started and the application was belated. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the employer is a Public body and position emerging from records was sought to be placed by amendment. Shri Rupnarayan, learned counsel states that incorrect position is placed on record and that too after huge delay and without offering any reason therefor. With the assistance of respective counsel, I have perused the impugned order. Respondent No. 1 is in service and he has filed complaint for consideration of his claim for promotion. The complaint is pending since 1996. The application for amendment is filed on 28.02.2007. The effort of the employer is to point out 2 the employees senior to Respondent No.1, with relevant records. It is, therefore, apparent that the amendment as sought cannot be said to be irrelevant. At this stage, merits of the amendment cannot be gone into and as the matter has not progressed much, the delay by itself cannot be a reason to deny amendment. The reference to provisions under Order 6, Rule 17 of C.P.C. in present situation is misconceived. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The prayer made at Exh. Ex. 26 is allowed. However, it is subject to the petitioner paying cost of Rs.2,000/- to Respondent No. 1 – complainant before the Industrial Court. The cost be paid on or before 10th May 2010. After the costs are so paid, the petitioner to carry out necessary amendment in its written statement. Liberty to respondent No. 1 to carry out consequential amendment or file rejoinder, if any. The proceedings in complaint are expedited and the court below is directed to decide the same as early as possible and in any case by 31st October 2010. Writ Petition is allowed. Rule accordingly. JUDGE *GS.