IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR [CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5042/08 IN LPA ST.10048/08 IN W.P.4646/05] [State of Mah & ors ..vs.. Indal Bajiral Lade] ================================== Miss. T. Khan, AGP for applicant Mr. ================================== CORAM: D.K. DESHMUKH & P.B. VARALE,JJ. DATE: 16TH DECEMBER, 2008. Delay in filing the appeal is of 474 days. The reasons that have been given for the delay are all of general nature. No specific reason has been given. Perusal of the order impugned shows that the L.P.A. against the main order has already been rejected. Learned counsel sought to argue that the Industrial Court had no jurisdiction to entertain a complaint because complainant was not in the employment on the date on which the complaint is filed and therefore, he should have gone to the Labour Court. Under the M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.P. Act a complaint against illegal termination of service can also be entertained by the Industrial Court if the termination is brought about contrary to law or in breach of settlement or award. Therefore, it can not be taken as absolute preposition that when ever there is complaint filed making grievance about the termination of service the Industrial Court will not have the jurisdiction. In each case it will be a question to be examined by the court on the facts of each case and therefore, as admittedly the appellant had not raised that objection either before the Industrial Court or the learned Single Judge, in our opinion it could not have been raised for the first time in this appeal. There is no substance. Condonation of delay will not serve purpose. Civil Application rejected. JUDGE JUDGE smp.