1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2572 OF 2010 (M/s. Gansons Ltd. vs. Shri B.P. Deshmukh & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. AUGUST 11, 2010. Heard finally Shri Puranik, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Raut, learned counsel for Respondent No. 1 and Shri Patel, learned AGP for respondents No. 2 & 3. It is not necessary to go into the details of the controversy as the learned Member of Industrial Court, Nagpur, has not recorded any finding on the prejudice caused to respondent No.1 – employee because of alleged illegalities in the conduct of departmental enquiry. Shri Raut, learned counsel has tried to urge that Labour Court, Nagpur, has recorded said finding of prejudice. Hence, I am not making any observations about those findings made by Labour Court. The aspect can be gone into by the Industrial Court while considering revision filed by the petitioner under Section 85 of Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. The petitioners have already reinstated Respondent No. 1 to show their bonafide and without 2 prejudice to their rights. In the circumstances, as the law as settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State Bank of Patiala vs. R.S. Sharma, reported at (1996) 3 SCC 364 has not been looked into, it will be appropriate to remand the matter back to Industrial Court for fresh consideration. For said purpose, the judgment dated 17.11.2009 is hereby quashed and set aside. Revision (BIR) No. 6 of 2002 is restored back to the file of Industrial Court, Nagpur, for its fresh consideration in accordance with law, at the earliest. The petitioner shall continue Respondent No. 1 in employment during the pendency of Revision. Writ Petition is, disposed of. Rule accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.