High Court Bench at Aurangabad quashed an Industrial Court order granting final relief on interim application during pending liquidation, holding statutory bar invoked and order unsustainable for lack of reasoning.
Impugned order dated 05.07.2002 quashed and set aside; Rule made absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.2774 OF 2002
Godawari Dudhana Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana, Deonandra, Taluka – Pathri, Dist. Parbhani Through its Managing Director .. Petitioner
Versus
2
Mr. Abhishek Patil, Advocate h/f. Mr. Deelip Bankar Patil, Advocate for the petitioner
Respondent Nos.1 to 7 – served.
CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. RESERVED ON : 17.02.2023 PRONOUNCED ON : 14.03.2023
JUDGMENT :
3
further submit that the complaint came to be filed by the respondents on 08.03.2002 without impleading the liquidator as party to the proceeding. He would further submit that on 08.03.2008 notice was issued to the petitioner, however in view of the liquidator being appointed there was no appearance caused before the Industrial Court and by interim order the respondent was directed to deposit the amount of wages and the retention allowance by holding that the respondents had made out a p rima facie case to seek interim relief. He would further submit that the respondents being workmen of Sakhar Karkhana were aware that the liquidator has been appointed as the same was published in the newspaper and also on 20.03.2002, a notice was affixed in the factory premises that the Collector Parbhani has been appointed as an administrator. He would further submit that interim order of liquidation was passed on 14.03.2002 and as such, without the leave of the Registrar the proceedings could not continue as the bar under Section 107 and Section 163 (2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act apply. He would further submit that the liquidation proceedings are still in force as is evident from the document which has been produced on record on 30.08.2022.
4
petitioner. Perused the material placed on record.
5
with Sakhar Karkhana, the respondents were well aware of this position and in spite of the same failed to bring the fact of appointment of liquidator to the notice of the Industrial Court. As far as the application below Exh.U-2 is concerned, by this application the respondents sought the final relief of payment of amount of wages and retention allowance, which the Industrial Court granted by the impugned order. Perusal of the impugned order shows that there are no reasonings and a very cryptic order has been passed granting interim relief. From the reading of the impugned order, it appears that it was only non-appearance of the respondent which prevailed upon the Industrial Court to pass the impugned order. There is no p rima facie case being made out.
6
10. In light of the facts above, the impugned order dated 05.07.2002 is not legally sustainable and is hereby quashed and set
aside.
11. Writ Petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute.
( SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. )
GGP
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an interim order directing deposit of wages can grant final relief without reasoning when liquidation proceedings are pending.
Whether industrial court proceedings can continue without Registrar's leave after liquidation order under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
none cited in textReferred
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Godawari Dudhana Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana, Deonandra, Taluka – Pathri, Dist. Parbhani Through its Managing Director
Annasaheb Rajaram Wadekar
Sudhakar Yeduba Mate
Baban Gulabchand Gonge
Kalyan Appasaheb Nakhate
Pralhad Sukhram Gaat
Sharmila U. Deshmukh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
