1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4902/2009 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS VS. BHAGWAT K. SHINDE Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Smt.T.D.Khade, AGP, for the petitioner. Shro Noukarkar, Advocate, for respondent. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 08, 2010. Heard. Perused the impugned judgment delivered by Industrial Court. The Industrial Court has found that there is nothing before it to show that respondent-employee was working under EGS Scheme. Though learned AGP has relied upon affidavit in examination-in-chief, material in cross examination, particularly paragraph 13, shows that work on EGS has not been established. Similarly, continuous service for past 5 years and working for minimum period of 240 days in each such year is also brought on record before the Industrial Court. The Industrial Court has in Paragraph 19 made a reference to ULP Complaint NO. 1124/87. That complaint was filed by the present respondent before the Labour Court challenging his termination and while allowing that complaint, Labour Court has found that between 3.2.1983 to 24.8.1987 he has worked continuously and for more than 240 days. This judgment has not been 2 assailed by the department. The respondent was subsequently terminated again and that termination was challenged by him before the Labour Court. The Labour Court protected his services and ultimately rejected his complaint ULP 645/99. The respondent then filed ULP Revision before the Industrial Court vide No.102/2008 and that has been allowed on 19th January, 2010. The petitioners are now preparing to challenge the said adjudication in revision. All these developments clearly show that by impugned order the learned Member of Industrial Court has correctly given the benefit of G.R. Dated 19.10.1996 to the respondent. No case is made out warranting any interference in writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE Rvjalit.