1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 2957/2008 Shri Gajanan Maharaj Sansthan, Shegaon ..vs.. Shri Gajanan Karmachari Sangh, thr. Its Gen. Secretary Buldhana and another -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A. R. Patil, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Yengal, A.G.P. for respondent no. 2. CORAM: B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 5 th DECEMBER, 2008 1. Heard. 2. Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that in an application under Section 33 (C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, the petitioner-employer wanted to incorporate subsequent events and also points out that respondent no.1-Union has ceased to function and that there was an award in relation to wages delivered by the Industrial Court, which was challenged right up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The contention sought to be raised by that application are in view of the award governing the wages, the employees could not have claimed minimum wages. 3. With the assistance of Mr. Patil, I have perused the 2 proposed amendment i.e. paragraph no. 3-A to 3-G as sought to be added. It is apparent that the paragraphs only mention the subsequent events and also sought to add the pleadings accordingly by amendment to the written statement. The Labour Court has found in paragraph 6 that the amendment to the written statement is not necessary. However, in my opinion, subsequent events ought to have been mentioned on record and relevant challenges needed to have been raised. The reasons given, therefore, cannot be sustained. Order dated 18.06.2008 passed below Exh.-21 is, therefore, quashed and set aside. The petitioner is permitted to carry out amendment as sought for by 31.12.2008. Respondent no. 1-Union or its representatives are free to carry out consequential amendment, if any, by 21.01.2009. 3. The writ petition is disposed of. No orders as to costs. JUDGE kahale