1 WP 675.2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 675 OF 2011 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. R.V.Ghuge , Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.T.K.Prabhakaran, Advocate for Res.nos.1 to 10 .......................... CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 09/06/2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The present respondents have filed complaint basically challenging the transfer orders issued by the present petitioner to the respondents and contending that the present petitioner has indulged in unfair labour practice. Along with said complaint, an application for interim relief was filed. The learned Member of the Industrial Court allowed the interim application and stayed the transfer orders of the respective complainants till the disposal of the Complaint. The present petitioner sought review/correction of the said 2 WP 675.2011 order. The same was also rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 3. Mr. R.V.Ghuge, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the ground on which the interim application was allowed, are not countenance by law. They are totally impermissible grounds. The Member, Industrial Court had gone on wrong premise. It had observed that the Union was registered on 6/9/2008, whereas it is registered on 6/10/2008 and that the salary given to the complainant was by way of unfair labour practice. According to the learned counsel, the Member, Industrial Court could not have stayed the transfer order on such grounds. 4. Mr. T.K.Prabhakaran, the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 10 supported the order passed by the Member, Industrial Court and contends that the date of registration of the union is not material. The learned counsel submits that the matter was now fixed for evidence and the Court has directed expeditious disposal of the same. Mr. R.V.Ghuge, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of the said directions, the matter is proceeding at snail’s pace. 3 WP 675.2011 5. Be that as it may. The fact remains that the interim order is in force since 22/10/2008. The matter is now fixed for evidence. As such, in stead of deciding the present Writ Petition on the factual and legal matrix, it would be in fitness of things to direct the Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad to dispose of the main petition itself within stipulated period. 6. As such, without entering into the merits of the matter, I dispose of the Writ Petition directing the Member, Industrial Court, Aurangabad to dispose of the Complaint (ULP) No. 137 of 2008 within the period of six ( 6 ) months from today. Needless to state that the said complaint would be decided independently dehors the observations made while passing order on the interim application. 7. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed off with aforesaid directions. No costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J. ] KNP/WP 675.2011