: 1 : USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2373 OF 2009 Garware Club House .. Petitioners v/s. Basant R. Dubey .. Respondent ......... Mr. H.H.Madon for the petitioner Mr. Dilip N. Mandavia and Neel Helekar for the respondent ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 13TH APRIL, 2010. P.C. : 1. The petitioners terminated the services of the respondent after conducting the departmental enquiry. That order came to be challenged by the respondent before the learned 10th Labour Court, Mumbai by filing complaint (ULP) No.456 of 1997) alleging therein that the petitioners had illegally terminated the services of the respondent and the order of termination amounted to be an unfair labour practice as understood in accordance with the provisions of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act (for short said Act). : 2 : Learned Judge of the Labour Court by his judgment and order dated 21st June, 2005, declared that the petitioners have committed unfair labour practice under item no.1(a) and (g) of schedule IV of said Act and directed the petitioners to cease and desist with such unfair labour practice. The petitioners were also directed to reinstate the respondent on his original post with continuity of service without back wages. 2. Being aggrieved by this order, the petitioners filed Revision Application (U.L.P.) No.226 of 2005 before the learned Member, Industrial Court. The respondent also filed Revision Application (U.L.P.) No.247 of 2005. The learned Member of the Industrial Court by his common judgment and order dated 16th March, 2009 partly allowed both the Revisions. He maintained the order of Labour Court on the point that petitioners is an industry. Rest of order of the Labour Court was set aside and Complaint No. (U.L.P.) 456 of 1997 was remanded to the 10th Labour Court, Mumbai for deciding the same in accordance with the provisions of law. 3. Rule is issued. Learned advocate for the respondent waives service. By consent, petition is taken up for final hearing hearing. I have perused the order passed by the learned Judge, Labour Court as well as the learned : 3 : Member of the Industrial Court. Learned Judge of the Labour Court by his order impugned in this petition, observed that the petitioners have committed unfair labour practice. He restored the services of the respondent without back wages. When the challenge was put up to this order, learned Member of the Industrial Court in his revisional jurisdiction could have gone into all questions and decide whether the findings arrived and the final decision arrived at by the learned Judge, Labour court is proper or otherwise. For reasons which do not appeal to this Court, the learned Member of Industrial Court remanded the matter. He has remanded the matter on all counts. This is being stated by reading item no.3 of the operative order passed by him. It is difficult to understand as to why there was a need for learned Member of the Industrial Court to remand the matter to the Labour Court on all counts, when Labour Court had considered the matter and had given a finding. Learned Member of the Industrial Court could have exercised its revisional powers and could have either confirmed the order of the Labour Court or could have set aside the order of the Labour Court. He should have decided both the revisions on merit. This order dated 16th March, 2009 is required to be set aside and both the revisions i.e. revision filed by the petitioners as well as the respondent will have to be restored to the file of the Industrial Court for decision on merits. The learned Member of the Industrial Court shall : 4 : exercise the revisional powers conferred upon the Court and pass a speaking order. Needless to mention that both the revisions will have to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and in any case before 31st July, 2010. In view of the above, following order is passed to dispose of this petition. ORDER (i) The Judgment and Order dated 16th March, 2009 passed by learned Member, Industrial Court, Mumbai in Revision Application (ULP) No.226 of 2005 and Revision Application (ULP) No.247 of 2005 is set aside. Both the aforesaid revisions are restored to the file of the Industrial Court. (ii) The learned President, Industrial Court shall assign both these revisions for hearing to a Member other than the learned Member who passed the order dated 16th March, 2009. The petitioners and the respondent shall appear before the concerned Member to whom the revisions shall be assigned on 23rd April, 2010 and have both the Revisions fixed for final hearing and once this job is done, these two revisions shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and in any case before 31st July, 2010. It is clarified that no views are expressed on the merits of the entire matter. A copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate of this : 5 : Court be made available to the learned advocate for the petitioners as well as learned advocate for the respondent so that both of them will mutually decide as to on what date they will have to appear before the learned President, Industrial Court for assignment of these two revisions to a Court. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]