WP/6526/2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6526 OF 2010 Uttam Bhivaji Pokharkar ..Petitioner V/s. The Divisional Traffic Superintendent, M.S.R.T.C., Divisional Officer, Pune ..Respondent Mr. U.B. Nighot for the Petitioner. Mr. G.S. Hegde for the Respondent. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATE : 6 TH SEPTEMBER, 2010. P.C. : 1. The petitioner has been issued a notice to show cause against the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer in respect of an enquiry held against him. Instead of submitting his explanation or comments on the enquiry report, the petitioner rushed to the Labour Court, Pune by filing Complaint (ULP) No.67 of 2009, under Item 1 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade WP/6526/2010 2 Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labout Practices Act, (for short “the MRTU & PULP Act”). The Labour Court rejected the application of the petitioner for interim relief. However, the said order was kept in abeyance for one month. Thereafter the petitioner approached the Industrial Court, Pune by filing the Revision Application (ULP) No.42 of 2010. That Revision Application was also came to be rejected and hence the present Writ Petition. 2. In my opinion, there is no need to entertain this Writ Petition. However, the petitioner may furnish his reply to the show cause notice issued by the respondent on 16th April, 2009 within a period of two weeks from today. 3. The respondent shall not terminate the services of the petitioner or take any other punitive action during this period of two weeks. WP/6526/2010 3 4. It is made clear that if the reply is not furnished within a period of two weeks from today, the respondent is at liberty to take such action, as may be advised, in view of the report in the enquiry proceedings. 5. The Writ Petition is rejected with aforesaid directions.