1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BEN CH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 5663/2009. ( Hindalco Industries Limited and another -: versus :- Ravishankar Laxminarayan Jonnaih and another ) 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. DATED : JANUARY 29, 2010. Heard Shri H.V. Thakur, learned counsel for petitioners and Ms. K.R. Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent no.1. Contention of petitioners/ employer is learned Member of Industrial Court has granted interim relief without expressly recording a finding that there was any unfair labour practice even prima facie. Learned counsel for respondent contends that the Industrial Court has found that the compulsion by employer to mark attendance was found to be unsustainable. I have perused the impugned order. The learned Member of Industrial Court has in paragraph no.10 considered the provision of Standing Order 5B and then found that the petitioners could not point out, under which provisions compulsion to mark attendance could be made. It is therefore, apparent that the fact that compulsion is not 2 permissible in law was noticed by the learned Member of the Industrial Court. Hence, no case is made out warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. However, the proceedings before the Industrial Court are expedited. The ULPA complaint be decided as early as possible and also uninfluenced by its order impugned before this Court. This court has also made observations only looking to the interlocutory nature of the order. This order shall also not influence the Industrial Court. Writ Petition is disposed of with these observations. No cost. JUDGE Rgd.