( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 219 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION (ST.) NO. 5996 OF 2003 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3675 OF 2002 Anupkumar Shantilal Jaiswal APPLICANT VERSUS Gopinath s/o Dashrath Nikam RESPONDENT ..... Mr. P.S. Pawar, advocate holding for Mr. R.S. Bihani, advocate for the applicant. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 8th February, 2010] PER COURT : 1. The applicant filed restoration application of which registration is refused by the learned Registrar (Judicial). There is delay of 1875 days in filing of the present application seeking setting aside of the said order. The applicant submits that there was delay in filing of the application because the Village Panchayat had no extra funds. The applicant is Sarpanch of the Village Panchayat. He submits that the Reference under ( 2 ) the Industrial Disputes Act was not maintainable and, therefore, the Industrial Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the application of the respondent. He has raised certain valid grounds because the respondent appears to be the husband of the then Sarpanch of the Village Panchayat and, therefore, the application filed by him was not seriously contested. Considering these reasons, the application is allowed. The delay is condoned and the Registrar’s order is recalled. It may be stated that the petition was dismissed in default before issuing notice to the respondent and, therefore, recalling of such order could be considered. The application for restoration may be enlisted for hearing on 22nd February, 2010. Present civil application is accordingly allowed. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/ca219-2010