: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (LDG.) NO.344 OF 2009 M/s.Satishkumar & Co. & Anr. ....Petitioners V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ....Respondents Mr.Ashish Kamat i/b Mr.S.S. Gawde for the Petitioners. Mr.Milind More, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. Ms.Neeta Karnik for Respondent No.2. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 18TH MARCH, 2009. P.C. : 1. The impugned order warrants no interference at this stage. On the question of limitation, the matter has been remanded to the Labour Court. The question of limitation was raised as a preliminary issue. Both the parties have been given liberty to reagitate the issue along with other issues. The impugned order clarifies that the issue of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact. In the circumstances, it is obvious that the Labour Court will decide the issue of limitation afresh and will not be bound by the findings in the impugned order. 2. In the facts and circumstances of this case, : 2 : interference with the impugned order is not warranted. The issue of limitation cannot be said to be open and shut. I am not on the merits of the second Respondents’ contention regarding the incident of 16.9.2000. I will assume that on merits there is much to be said in favour of the Petitioners regarding the same. However, whether the same furnishing a fresh cause of action or not is to be decided. I hasten to add the Petitioners’ contentions to the contrary is also kept open. 3. Further it is made clear that it is always open to the Petitioners to challenge any findings in the impugned order from the final order, if necessary. 4. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is dismissed.