wp2228.11.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.2228 OF 2011 Mah.Sahkari Adiwasi Vikas Mahamandal & anr Vs. Karnuji Amruta Madavi. ............................................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................. Mrs.S.W.Deshpande, Counsel for the Petitioners. CORAM : R. K.DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 05th DECEMBER, 2011. The Labour Court has recorded the finding that the complainant worked from 7.6.1990 till 12.8.2002 and he had completed more than 240 days continuous service preceding the date of his termination. The finding is based upon the salary chart from 1998 till August, 2002 produced at Exh.36-A by the petitioner/employer. There is also finding recorded that the procedure as laid down under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, has not been followed. On these findings, the petitioner/employer has held to be engaged in an unfair labour practice as contemplated under Item No.1(a), (b) & (d) of Schedule-IV of the Unfair Labour Practices Act, in terminating his services. However, in spite of this, ultimately the relief of continuity in service with back wages is rejected and the employer is directed to pay the retrenchment compensation in terms of Section 25F(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act. This order was the subject matter of revision before the Industrial Court, which has been dismissed on 4.8.2010 confirming the finding recorded by the Labour Court. It is not the .....2/- wp2228.11.odt 2 petition of the complainant, but the petition of the employer. In view of ultimate relief granted by the Labour Court, which has been confirmed, no interference is called for in the present writ petition. The same is dismissed. JUDGE BrWankhede ...../-