1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. Writ Petition No. 241 of 2008 1. Plantation Officer, Darwha Range, TQ. Darwha, Distt. Yavatmal. 2. The Deputy Director of Social Forestry, Yavatmal, Distt. Yavatmal. .. .. .. PETITIONERS VERSUS Kisan Zolbaji Gawande, Aged about 55 years, R/o Erthal Po. Kulkard, Tq. Darwha, Distt. Yavatmal. .. .. .. RESPONDENT CORAM : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J. DATE : 3 rd December, 2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 2. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the parties that writ petitions wherein identical issues were involved, were remanded by this Court to the Labour Court with a direction to the Labour Court to frame the necessary issues after 2 permitting the parties to amend the pleadings. According to the learned counsel for the parties, Writ Petition Nos. 423/2005, 424/2005, 1077/2005 and 2805/2005 were decided by a common judgment dated 13th of October, 2008, and by allowing the writ petitions, this Court had remanded the matters to the Labour Court to frame the issues as to whether the Forest Department or the Department of Social Forestry was an Industry or not. This Court also directed the Labour Court to consider the controversy in the light of the judgment of the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Umadevi reported in AIR 2006 Supreme Court 1806 and also the subsequent judgments. 3. In the instant case also, the Labour Court has not framed the said issue though it was the case of the petitioner before the Labour Court that the complaint filed by the respondent was not maintainable as the respondent was appointed under the Employment Guarantee Scheme and the Employment Guarantee Scheme was held not to be an Industry. It appears that the evidence is not tendered by the parties on this issue and it is, therefore, necessary to permit the parties to tender the evidence on this issue also. 3 4. Hence for the reasons recorded in the judgment dated 13th of October, 2008, in Writ Petition Nos. 423/2005 and the other three writ petitions, and also for the reason that the evidence is not tendered by the petitioner on the issue of the employment of the respondent in pursuance of Employment Guarantee Scheme, the judgments passed by the Labour and Industrial Courts are hereby set aside. The matter is remanded to the Labour Court for a fresh decision on the complaint, on merits. The Labour Court is directed to decide the complaint as early as possible and positively within a period of one year from today. The parties undertake to remain present before the Labour Court, Yavatmal, on 15th of January, 2009 so that issuance of individual notices to the parties are dispensed with. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. JUDGE RMP