1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7166 OF 2009 M.S.R.T.C. ....Petitioner V/s. Ramsingh T. Pawar ....Respondent Mr.G.S. Hegde for the Petitioner. Mr.S.S. Kulkarni for the Respondent. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 27TH JANUARY, 2010. P.C. :- 1. Rule. By consent the Rule is made returnable and heard forthwith. 2. The Respondent had been dismissed for having allegedly violated clause 34 of the Discipline & Appeal Procedure available to the employees of the Petitioner – Corporation. The Labour Court dismissed the Respondent’s complaint. The Industrial Court remanded the matter for the reasons which are not very clear. The entire record was before the Industrial Court. If the Industrial Court did not agree with the findings or observations of the Labour Court, it was free to overrule/set-aside the same. There was no warrant for remanding the matter in the present circumstances. In fact some of the observations indicate that the Industrial Court did not agree with those of the Labour Court. That by itself is not a 2 ground for remanding the matter. 3. In the circumstances, the impugned order is set-aside. The Industrial Court is directed to hear and decide the matter afresh. The Industrial Court will neither be bound nor influenced by the observations in the impugned order. 4. The parties shall appear before the Industrial Court in the first instance on 17.2.2010 and thereafter as they may be directed by the Industrial Court.