Dmt 1 lpa88-11 dmt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 88 OF 2011 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 723 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5373 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 115 OF 2011 Castrol India Ltd., & Anr. .... Appellants. vs. Mumbai Port Trust and General Employees Union. .... Respondent. Mr. J.P. Cama, Sr. Advocate, with Hemant Talkar, Mr. A. Mehta i/by Haresh Mehta & Co. for Appellants. Mr. P.B. Shah for Respondents. CORAM : P.B. MAJMUDAR & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 27TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. By consent, this appeal is taken up for hearing at the stage of admission itself. Dmt 2 lpa88-11 2. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellant company against the order passed by the learned Single Judge directing the appellant company to comply with the provisions of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It is argued on behalf of the appellant that since there is no order of reinstatement in the present case, Section 17-B is not applicable. Mr. Shah, the learned counsel for the respondents vehemently submitted that the impugned order of the learned Single Judge is in the nature of reinstatement and, therefore, Section 17-B is attracted. However, during the hearing of this appeal, consensus prevailed between the counsel and it is submitted that since the appeal is against the interlocutory order, the main writ petition itself be directed to be decided forthwith. Considering the point involved in the matter, in our view, instead of deciding the applicability of Section 17-B in this appeal, it is desirable that the writ petition itself is disposed of at the earliest. We, therefore, request the learned Single Judge to dispose of the writ petition as early as possible and latest by 25.11.2011 by giving priority to the matter. Till the writ petition is decided, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge regarding Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to remain stayed. 3. It is clarified that we have not decided the appeal on merits. The learned Single Judge to decide the writ petition on its own merits without being influenced by the present order. Dmt 3 lpa88-11 4. Subject to what is stated above, the Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 5. In view of what is stated above, the civil application also stands disposed of accordingly. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (P.B. MAJMUDAR, J.)