1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3211 OF 2006 Nashik District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs. Pralhad Popatrao Ghangale ..Respondent. ... Mr. B.V. Bukhari for the Petitioner. Ms. Preetam Tendulkar h/f Mr. M.S. Karnik for the Respondent. ... CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 29th June, 2006. P.C. : This Petition is directed against a purely procedural order passed by the Labour Court on 23rd November, 2005 which was affirmed in revision on 1st March, 2006. 19 Complaints were filed by the workmen seeking reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. The application which was filed before the Labour Court was to the effect that all the other workmen should be excluded from the Court hall when the cross examination of one of the complainants was being carried out. The Trial Judge held that the employer has already disclosed his defence in the written statement. I am more than satisfied that no prejudice will be caused to the management and the Labour Court was justified in 2 coming to the conclusion as it did. No case for interference is made out. Learned counsel submits that the ends of justice would be met if each of the 19 complaints is posted for recording evidence on separate days. This is a matter where the Trial Court must be left to arrange the work of the Court in an appropriate manner. The Trial Court is at liberty to take such procedural decisions as are appropriate. The Petition is dismissed.