1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3259/2002 (LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD. CHANDRAPUR VERSUS CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR & ANOTHER) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None for the petitioner. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 11 , 2011 . It appears from a perusal of the order-sheet that none appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 15.12.2009 and 09.12.2010. I have perused the petition and the prayers made therein. The petitioner had sought a direction to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal to allow Shri Pawaskar, an Officer of the Employers’ Federation to act and conduct the matter before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal by quashing and setting aside the order passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal on 30.07.2001 disallowing Shri C.V. Pawaskar to conduct the case of the petitioner. The petitioner had also sought an interim stay to the proceedings before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal during the pendency of this petition. It appears that this Court had, by an interim order dated 16.12.2002, permitted Shri C.V. Pawaskar to represent the petitioner in the matter pending before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. Hence, the purpose of filing 2 the instant petition stands served as the petitioner was represented by Shri C.V. Pawaskar in the matter before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal after December- 2002. Since the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed in view of the order passed by this Court in December-2002, the writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE