(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 7102 OF 2009 Pravara Medical Trust, At Loni, Taluka : Rahata, District : Ahmednagar, Through its Secretary, Shri Rajendra E. Vikhe Patil, Age : 46 years, Occupation : Agriculture, .. Petitioner R/o. Loni, Taluka : Rahata, (Original District : Ahmednagar. opponent) versus 1. Sairabano Ayyub Shaikh, Age : 45 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Padmashree Nagar, Sadatpur Road, Loni, Taluka : Rahata, District : Ahmednagar. 2. Rajendra s/o. Khandu Paimode, Age : 40 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Pravara Nagar, Taluka : Rahata, District : Ahmednagar. (2) 3. Sunanda Manohar Chokhar, Age : 40 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Chanegaon, Taluka : Sangamner, District : Ahmednagar. 4. Kamal Suresh Gholap, Age : 43 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Loni, Taluka : Rahata, District : Ahmednagar. 5. Deelip s/o. Murlidhar Yadav, Age : 42 years, Occupation : Labour, R/o. Loni (Kd), .. Respondents Taluka : Rahata, (Original District : Ahmednagar. complainants) .......................... Mr. V.D. Hon, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. P.V. Barde, Advocate, for respondent nos.1 to 5. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 15TH DECEMBER 2009. (3) COURT'S ORDER : 1. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner undertakes to pay additional four sets of court fees, inasmuch as, the order impugned has been passed in five complaints. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 3. By way of present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 24th September 2009, passed by the learned Member of the Industrial Court, Ahmednagar, below Exhibit U-23 in Complaint (ULP) Nos. 248/1996, 117/1997, 131/1997, 235/1997 and 153/1997, thereby allowing the application filed by the present respondents for issuing summons to the concerned officer in the office of the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Nashik, for production of documents. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the application has been filed after the evidence of both the parties in the complaint was closed and that too without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to file his say. 5. From the perusal of the record, it is apparent that the impugned order has been passed without giving an opportunity to the petitioner, to file his say, to the application filed by the respondents complainants. It is thus clear that the order has been passed in breach of principles of natural justice. (4) 6. In the result, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause "B". The learned Member of the Industrial Court shall consider the application, filed by the respondents employees, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to file his reply. There shall be no order as to costs. ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/7102wp