1 wp5670.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5670 OF 2010 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. K.M. Nagarkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Addl. G.P. for respondent no.1. Mr. B.N. Patil, Advocate for respondent nos.2 and 3. 1. Heard Advocates Mr. Nagarkar for the petitioner -employee, Mr. Patil for respondent nos.2 and 3 and learned A.G.P. for respondent no.1. 2. After perusal of the orders passed under Section 50 of the M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.P. Act by Industrial Court, it is apparent that because of order of this Court dated 13.08.2009, the Industrial Court found that grievance before it was satisfied. This finding is based upon observations of this Court in the said judgment dated 13.08.2009. The relevant observations therein reads, "in view of absorption of respondent no.1 in the office of Superintendent of Land Records, the grievance of respondent no.1 was removed by the Government." Because of this, Writ Petition was found rendered 2 wp5670.10 infructuous and has been disposed of accordingly. 3. Effort of Mr. Nagarkar for petitioner is now to show that the grievance of said respondent no.1 i.e. the present petitioner was not satisfied. The contention can not be looked into by this Court in the present Petition. Learned Industrial Court has correctly appreciated the material presented before it. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity. Hence, with liberty to petitioner to take such appropriate steps as are open in law, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 18.02.2011 gas/wp5670.10