1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. L.P.A. No. 202/2011 in WRIT PETITION NO.969/2011 (Alka Manohar Gawai .vs. Vidya Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and another. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED : JUNE 24, 2011 Heard Advocate Shri P.D. Meghe for appellant/employee and Advocate Shri V.P. Marpakwar for respondents. In ULP complaint filed before the Industrial Court, appellant moved an application under Section 30(2) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 and sought interim direction to pay her salary in accordance with the minimum wages. In reply, the employer (present respondent) denied relationship. The application under Section 30 (2) was considered by the Industrial Court and the Industrial Court found that there was simple denial. The employer nowhere pointed out that present appellant was working under any contractor. It also relied upon some documents to note that relationship appeared to be indisputable. In view of this finding, the interim direction to pay minimum wages 2 was issued. That direction was questioned before this Court in Writ Petition No.969/2011. This Court while issuing Rule in the matter, has noted that as relationship was in dispute, the interim relief as prayed for by the respondents needed to be granted. Accordingly the direction to pay minimum wages has been stayed. That order is questioned before this Court. After hearing respective counsel, we find that the learned Member of the Industrial Court has looked into documents produced on record to hold that relationship appeared to be indisputable In view of that finding, the Industrial Court has proceeded to exercise jurisdiction and granted interim relief. We, therefore, do not see any justification for granting interim relief to the employer during the pendency of the writ petition. In this situation, we set aside that part of the order by which the direction to pay minimum wages has been stayed. The respondent shall continue to pay minimum wages to present appellant during the pendency of ULP complaint No. 38/2010 before the Industrial Court. The Industrial Court shall expedite and attempt to decide the ULP Complaint No. 38/2010 as early as possible and in any case before 31.12.2011. Advocate Mr. Marpakwar for respondents points out that appellant has filed criminal complaint for not implementing the interim order dated 12.07.2010 before the Labour Court under Section 48 (1) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. Advocate Mr. Meghe states that said complaint will be withdrawn 3 immediately if the respondents implement the orders of the Industrial Court. Advocate Mr. Marpakwar states that if complaint is withdrawn, in the next week, the orders will be implemented immediately. In this situation, LPA is accordingly partly allowed. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE halwai