1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION rpa WRIT PETITION NO. 254 OF 2010 Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. .. Petitioners. v/s. Jennifer O. Erasmus .. Respondents. .... Mr. K. M. Naik a/w. Mr. Sujeet P. Salkar for the Petitioners. Mr. Vinod Tayade for the Respondents. .... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 11, 2010. P.C. Following order is passed by consent of the parties: :: O R D E R :: i. The Complaint (ULP) No. 48 of 2002 shall be decided by the Labour Court, Mumbai afresh by framing only one issue i.e. “ whether there is any termination of the services of the Respondent on 15th January, 2002 and whether the same was illegal ?” 2 ii. However, it is clarified that whilst deciding the said issue, the Labour Court, Mumbai will be free to take into account/consider all the contentions of the parties pertaining to what had transpired between 2nd January, 2002 and 15th January, 2002. iii. It is further clarified that the liberty granted to the Petitioners by an order of this Court (Coram : S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.) dated 5th May, 2008, shall continue and it is left open for the Petitioners to impugn the issue as to whether the Respondent is a workmen as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, after the complaint is decided on merits. iv. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with no order as to costs. [ S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ] 3