1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 335 OF 2010 Bhimrao Chepaji Meshram -: versus :- Chief Executive Officer and others. 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 : APRIL 13, 2010. The matter was also before this Court in Writ Petition No. 2364/2008 and because of the orders dated 07.01.2009 the matter has been again considered by the Industrial Court. Vide impugned order dated 17.03.2009 Misc. Application (ULPN) No.42/2007 has been dismissed by the Industrial Court after noticing that the application was not within limitation and necessary parties were not joined. Shri R.V. Gaikwad, learned counsel for petitioner states that the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad is the employer and he was party before the Industrial Court. The other persons are therefore neither necessary nor proper parties in Application under Section 50 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act. He further points out that though respondent nos. 1 to 3 are served with notice for final disposal, they have chosen not to appear. Learned A.G.P. for respondent no.4 states that the respondent no.4 is a formal party, but then to assist the court he invites attention to the findings recorded by the Industrial Court to urge that as necessary parties were not 2 there, the cognizance could not have been taken. It is a settled law that the proceedings under Section 50 of the Act cannot be dismissed merely because application for condonation of delay has not been filed. The court has to give an opportunity to such applicant to file appropriate application seeking condonation. That opportunity has not been given in the present matter. Also it is not the case that parties to ULP Complaint No.136/2005 were not joined as party respondent in ULPN No. 42/2007. The finding therefore of non joinder of necessary parties is unsustainable. However, as I am inclined to permit petitioner to file appropriate application explaining the delay, I am not concluding the controversy, this is also necessary because the other respondents have chosen not to appear though a notice for final disposal is served upon them. The impugned order dated 17.03.2010 passed below Exh.32 in Misc. ULPN No. 42/2007 by the Industrial Court, Bhandara is quashed and set aside. The proceedings are restored back to the said Court. Petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate application seeking condonation of delay by 15.05.2010. If such application is filed, the learned Member of the Industrial Court shall proceed to decide the same in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the parties in the matter. Writ Petition is disposed of with above directions, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.