1 wp6279-11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 6279/2011 (MAROTI YELLAYA BONGONIWAR VERSUS HON'BLE MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL Court, BHANDARA & ANOTHER) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri S.R. Bhongade, counsel for the petitioner. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : DECEMBER 21 , 2011 . By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order passed by the Industrial Court on 18.11.2011 rejecting an application filed by the petitioner under Section 30(2) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The petitioner was transferred from Dabha to Sindpuri Milk Centre by an order dated 10.11.2011. The petitioner challenged the transfer order by filing a complaint in the Industrial Court and also sought stay to the transfer order dated 10.11.2011 during the pendency of the complaint. It was the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was being transferred to Sindpuri Milk Centre where one Ajay Wanjari was working and the petitioner had lodged a complaint against the said employee for beating up the petitioner. It was the case of the petitioner that Shri Ajay Wanjari would try to pressurize the petitioner for not giving 2 wp6279-11 the evidence against him, in the case pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class. The petitioner pleaded that the respondent no.2 transferred him because of the union activities and because he had filed cases against the respondent no.2. On the appreciation of the material on record, the Industrial Court, by the impugned order dated 18.11.2011, rejected the application for grant of stay to the transfer order. The Industrial Court held that there was nothing on record to establish that only because of the union activities, the petitioner was being transferred. The Industrial Court observed that though there was a series of litigation between the petitioner and the respondent, the respondent had not transferred only the petitioner by the said order but, three other persons were transferred along with the petitioner and they had joined the place of posting. The Industrial Court prima-facie found that the transfer was on administrative ground and it was not necessary to stay the same during the pendency of the complaint. It is not clear from the order of the Industrial Court whether the point that Shri Ajay Wanjari may try to pressurize the petitioner was argued before the Industrial Court or not and even if it is assumed that it was argued, it is necessary to note that the petitioner could not have sought a stay to the transfer order only by submitting that Shri Ajay Wanjari, the other employee, would try to pressurize the petitioner so that the petitioner may not adduce evidence against him in the pending criminal case. The Industrial Court found that the petitioner was working as a Milk Procurement Supervisor and since supervision was necessary at Sindpuri Milk Centre, he 3 wp6279-11 was transferred to Sindpuri Milk Centre. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by the Industrial Court. In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE