Lsp IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9161 of 2007 Igatpuri Municipal Counil, Igatpuri ..Petitioner V/s. Shri Pravin Govind Revar ..Respondent Mr.S.S.Pakale, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.M.S.Karnik, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mrs. Ranjana Todankar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 & 3 CORAM CORAM CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE,J. : B.H.MARLAPALLE,J. : B.H.MARLAPALLE,J. DATED DATED DATED : 7th March, 2008 : 7th March, 2008 : 7th March, 2008 P.C. Heard Mr.Pakale, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner Municipal Council. Rule. 2. Respondent waives service. 3. By the consent of the parties the petition is taken up for final hearing forthwith. 4. The Respondent No.1 had filed Complaint(ULP)No.210/2000 and the said complaint was allowed by the Industrial Court on 22-11-2005. The Council approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 646/2006 and the same was allowed partly. The impugned order was quashed and set aside and the complaint filed 2 by the Respondent No.1 was restored and remanded for fresh decision. Accordingly on remand the complaint has been partly allowed as per the Judgement and order dated 18-10-2007 and the Municipal Council has been directed to give promotion to Respondent No.1 to the post of Library Clerk w.e.f. 22-9-1997 with all privileges and benefits attached to the said post. The said order has been impugned in this petition. 5. Respondent No.3 had filed an application at Exh. UA-2 in Complaint(ULP)No. 210/2000 for being impleaded as an additional Respondent and the same application was rejected by the Industrial Court on 6-10-2007. As Complaint(ULP)No. 210/2000 has been allowed by the impugned order, there is no doubt that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are likely to be reverted. Apprehending this consequent order of reversion from the post of Library clerk, the Respondent No.3 has already approached the Industrial Court and filed Complaint(ULP)No. 86/2007. By way of interim-relief in the said complaint, the Industrial Court has directed status-quo to be maintained. Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit in reply and supported the petition. She has been promoted to the post of Library clerk w.e.f. 1-7-1999 on the basis of seniority cum merit. It has also been stated by her that there was only one post of Library Clerk under the Petitioner Municipal Council. Respondent No.2 3 was also not impleaded as an additional Respondent in Complaint(ULP)No. 210/2000 nor she had made any application for being impleaded as such before the Industrial Court. 6. In view of the status-quo order passed by the Industrial Court in the complaint filed by the Respondent No.3 and as noted hereinabove, the impugned order in this petition cannot be implemented and, therefore, it was necessary for the Industrial Court to hear the Respondent No.2 and 3 as well in Complaint(ULP)No.210/2000. Be that as it may, it would be in the interest of respective parties and the Council that Complaint(ULP)no. 210/2000 and Complaint(ULP)No. 86/2007 are clubbed by restoring Complaint(ULP)No. 210/2000 and heard and decided a fresh. Undoubtedly Respondent No.2 will submit an application before the Industrial Court for being impleaded as an additional Respondent in both the complaints within a period of two weeks from today. 7. Hence, the Petition is partly allowed and the impugned Judgement and order dated 18-10-2007 rendered by the Industrial Court at Nashik is hereby quashed and set aside and Complaint(ULP)No. 210/2000 is restored and remanded for fresh decision alongwith Complaint(ULP)no. 86/2007. The Complaints will be 4 heard and decided as per law, as expeditiously as possible and preferably by 31st July, 2008. [B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.] [B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.] [B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.]