1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4244 OF 2009 Shri Bhogawati Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd & Anr. ..... Petitioners. V/s Dhondiram Tukaram Patil ..... Respondent. Mr. S.S. Pakale i/b Mr. K.J. Phakade for petitioners. Mr. M.S. Topkar for the respondent. CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 8TH JULY, 2009 P.C:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent. 2. Petitioner – Karkhana is challenging the order passed by the Labour Court which has framed an additional issue in respect of perversity of the findings given by the Inquiry Officer at issue No.2(a). This order passed by the Labour Court was confirmed by the Industrial Court. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, Petitioner – Karkhana has filed this Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 2 3. The record indicates that this is a fourth round of litigation and, earlier, on three occasions, the matter had travelled upto this Court and on one occasion upto Supreme Court. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Labour Court and Industrial Court have allowed the application filed by the respondent for framing an additional issue on the question of perversity and have directed that the said issue should be decided as preliminary issue. It is submitted that it is not open for the respondent to now file an application for deciding the issue of perversity as preliminary issue. 4. In my view, apprehension expressed by the petitioners is misconceived. Labour Court has merely framed this issue at issue No.2(a). It has not stated that the said issue would be decided as preliminary issue. It has directed both parties to lead evidence. In my view, therefore, it is not necessary to interfere with the order passed by the Labour Court. Hearing of the BIR Application is expedited. All contentions raised by both the parties are kept open. Petition is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J)