1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6285 OF 2008 The Chief Officer, Municiapl Council, Jintur, District Parbhani. ....Petitioner. Versus 1. Hemant Laxmanrao Chavan, R/o. Near Bus Stand, Main Road, Jintur, District Parbhani. 2. The State of Maharashtra Through Secretary Law and Judiciary. ....Respondents. Shri.G.P. Sonpawle, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri.A.R.Nikam, Advocate for the respondent No. 1. Shri.K.S.Patil, A.G.P. for respondent No. 2. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 18th JUNE, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Heard forthwith by consent of parties. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 7th of July 2008 vide which the complaint filed by the respondent/ 2 employee came to be allowed. 3. The respondent/ employee has filed the complaint challenging alleged oral termination dated 22nd of June 2005. Initially the complaint was filed before the Labour Court, Jalna. On the establishment of Labour Court at Nanded, it came to be transferred to Nanded. 4. Shri. Sonpawle, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has produced relevant record at Labour Court at Jalana. He further submits that since the petitioner had not received any notice after the matter was transferred to Nanded, the petitioner could not be represented. He further submits that petitioner could not put up its case before the learned Labour Court, Nanded and as a result of which the exparte order is passed against the petitioner. 5. Shri. Nikam, learned counsel on behalf of the respondent No. 1 submits that the learned Labour Court has passed the order on its merits and as such no interference is warranted. 6. It appears that initially the complaint was filed before the Labour Court, Jalna and on the establishment of Labour Court of Nanded it came to be transferred at Labour Court Nanded and the petitioner was not served with the notice of the hearing of the matter. 3 7. In that view of the matte, the order has been passed without petitioner having reasonable opportunity in the matter. 8. The impugned order dated 7.7.2008 passed by the Labour Court, Nanded is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Labour Court, Nanded for deciding the complaint of the respondent afresh after giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the respondent/ complainant. However, the petitioner is directed to deposit the costs which are quantified at Rs.3000/- (Rs. three thousand) in the labour Court, Nanded. On deposit of costs, the respondent No. 1 is at liberty to withdraw the same. The learned Labour Court is directed to expedite the hearing of the complaint and decide the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within six months from the date of the receipt of this order. [ B.R. GAVAI, J. ] ssc/wpwp6285.08