1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Writ Petition NO.3688/2010 The Daryapur Taluka Coop.Agri. Sale andPurchase Soc. Ltd. Daryapur and another Vs. Sumati V. Ingle and others. 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. DECEMBER13, 2010. Heard Advocate Palshikar for the petitioners, AGP Ms. Deshpande for respondents 2 and 3. Though respondent no.1 had filed caveat after service of notice in the present matter, she has not chosen to engage any advocate. By order dated 22.3.2010 learned Member of Industrial Court imposed costs of Rs. 500/- condition precedent for setting aside ex-parte order. That costs could not be deposited within time and hence application seeking extension of time for said purpose was moved. It was rejected on 12/4/2010 and that order was questioned before this Court. It is apparent that petitioner being a society could not arrange to deposit the amount within time but then application seeking extension of time was moved and has been rejected within one month of 22.3.2010 i. e. on 12.4.2010 itself. 2 This Court on 12th August 2010 directed the petitioner to deposit costs of Rs. 1000/- with Industrial Court and the Industrial Court was permitted to proceed further with Revision on merits if the costs were so deposited. Accordingly, costs have been deposited with the Industrial Court. Advocate Palshikar points out that revision is already disposed of and hence proceedings in ULP No. 31/2005 have revived. Respondent no.3 - Labour Court has to begin those proceedings now. Respondent no.1 is permitted to withdraw the costs deposited by the petitioner. Respondent no.3 Labour Court shall proceed further with adjudication of ULP No.31/2005 on merits as directed by Industrial Court in its order dated 22/3/2010. Petition is thus allowed. No costs. JUDGE Ambulkar