FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6908 OF 2008 with WRIT PETITION Nos.6911, 6913 and 6914/2008. ___________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|___________________________________ These petitions are filed challenging the final judgments and orders dated 18.9.2008 passed in Complaint (ULP) Nos. 98 of 2000 and No.3/2000. 2 It is not necessary, at this stage, to go into the details of the facts since the learned Counsel for the petitioner has canvassed the main point that without framing any issue in respect of Gram Panchayat Resolution dated 29th June, 1999, the Member, Industrial Court, Ahmednagar, by exceeding jurisdiction has commented upon the said resolution. Not only that, the Industrial Court has opined that the Sarpanch of the concerned Gram Panchayat has not signed the resolution of the Gram Panchayat. According to the learned Counsel, the Industrial Court has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction and it is not within the domain and jurisdiction of the Industrial Court to deal with the Gram Panchayat resolution. According to the learned Counsel, the relevant provisions to deal with Gram Panchayat Resolution is Section 37 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (for short, referred to as the said Act) and, therefore, the learned Counsel would submit that the impugned judgment and order passed by the Industrial Court is in excess of its jurisdiction. Many issues have been dealt with, which were not either argued by the the Advocate for complainant or respondent. Therefore, this is a fit case wherein this Court should interfere and set aside the judgment and order passed by the Member, Industrial Court, Ahmednagar. 3 The learned Counsel for respondent No.2 Corporation submits that the resolution which was passed by the Gram Panchayat on 29th June, 1999 was keeping in mind the date of the Government Resolution which was to come into operation from 1st July, 1999 and by said resolution, Gram Panchayat has appointed number of persons without rendering any service with the Gram Panchayat. The learned Counsel, therefore, supported the findings recorded by the Industrial Court. 4 The learned A.G.P. invited my attention to the provisions of section 61 of the said Act and Rule 4 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Servants (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1960 (for short, referred to as the said Rules) and submitted that the stand of the State Government is that the impugned judgment and orders passed by the Member, Industrial Court is after taking into consideration the entire evidence brought on record and in consonance with the provisions of the said Act and Rules, and, therefore, no interference is called for in writ jurisdiction by this Court. 5 Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the learned Counsel for respondent Counsel and on perusal of the judgments and orders passed by the Industrial Court, I am of the considered view that the Member, Industrial Court has exceeded its jurisdiction and has commented upon the Gram Panchayat Resolution without framing any specific issue to that effect. Prima facie, I find substance in the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that under Section 37 of the said Act, the authenticity of the Gram Panchayat Resolution can be decided some where else and the Industrial Court is not competent to deal with the said issue. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter needs to be remanded back to the Industrial Court for fresh consideration. I find considerable force in the submission. 6 Having been convinced that the Member, Industrial Court has exceeded its jurisdiction, the judgments and orders passed by the Industrial court cannot be sustained. 7 Therefore, the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned judgments and orders are quashed and set aside. The matters are remanded back to the Industrial Court, Ahmednagar to decide the same afresh after taking into consideration the contentions raised by the parties, within a period of six months from today. Petitions allowed accordingly and disposed of. (S.S. SHINDE, J). 21.08.2009. PLK/#