Jitendra S/O Tarachand Supare and Others Vs Municipal Council, Paoni, Tq. Paoni Dist. Bhandara and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Jitendra S/O Tarachand Supare and Others Vs Municipal Council, Paoni, Tq. Paoni Dist. Bhandara and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition partly allowed: order dated 25.01.2024 in complaint ULP 22/2022 set aside on issue No.1 only; matter remanded to the Industrial Court, Bhandara solely to decide issue No.1, with petitioners permitted to lead evidence only on that issue; writ petition thereafter disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, who were not given an opportunity to lead evidence on issue No.1 because it was framed only on 03.01.2024 after they had completed their evidence, are entitled to have the matter remanded to the Industrial Court solely for deciding issue No.1 with liberty to lead evidence on it.

Ratio / Principle

Since the additional issue No.1 was framed on 03.01.2024 after the petitioners had already completed their evidence, the petitioners were deprived of any opportunity to lead evidence on that issue; accordingly, without examining the merits or the other issues, the matter is remanded to the Industrial Court solely for deciding issue No.1.

Key takeaways

The petitioners' omission to raise an objection when the additional issue was framed does not bar relief, because the decisive fact remains that they were never given an opportunity to lead evidence on issue No.1.ratio¶16
On remand, the petitioners may lead evidence only on issue No.1.ratio¶16
The impugned order of 25.01.2024 is set aside only with respect to issue No.1, leaving the remaining issues undisturbed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench), Siddheshwar S. Thombre, J. (14.10.2025) - Writ Petition No. 1377 of 2024, Jitendra s/o Tarachand Supare and ors. v. Municipal Council, Paoni Dist. Bhandara thr. its Chief Officer and another. The Industrial Court, Bhandara had dismissed the petitioners' complaint ULP 22/2022 by order dated 25.01.2024. Issue No.1 was framed as an additional issue only on 03.01.2024, after the petitioners had completed their evidence, so they had no opportunity to lead evidence on it; their silence at the time of framing did not defeat this grievance. Without touching the merits or the other issues, the Court set aside the impugned order on issue No.1 only, remanded the matter solely for decision of issue No.1, and permitted the petitioners to lead evidence confined to that issue. Petition partly allowed and disposed of.

35 wp no. 1377.24.odt..odt

1

2025:BHC-NAG:10983

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 1377 OF 2024 Jitendra s/o Tarachand Supare and ors. .Vs.

Municipal Council, Paoni Dist. Bhandara thr. its Chief Officer and another

__________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

Mr Feroz Khan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr M.I. Dhatrak, Advocate for the respondent No.1.

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR .S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 14.10.2025

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

The petition is directed against the order dated 25.01.2024 in complaint ULP 22/2022 passed by the Industrial Court, Bhandara whereby complaint filed by the petitioners came to be dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that issue No.1 was framed by the Industrial Court after the petitioners had completed their evidence, and the matter was proceeded. Therefore, they could not get any opportunity to lead the evidence on issue No.1. Therefore, the petitioners pray to remand the matter to Industrial Court, permitting them to lead the evidence on issue No.1.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioners did not raise any objection

2 35 wp no. 1377.24.odt..odt

when the issue was framed and proceeded without objections. The learned counsel further contends that the petitioners only raised this ground now because the complaint was dismissed. They are now making it a ground to remand the matter to the learned Industrial Court.

I have gone through the documents as well as pleadings, it is an admitted fact that the additional issue was framed on 03.01.2024 and before that the petitioners have completed their evidence. Therefore, naturally, the petitioners could not get an opportunity to lead the evidence on the additional issue that was framed. Although the petitioners had not raised an objection during the proceedings but the fact that the petitioners were not given an opportunity to lead the evidence on issue No.1. Therefore, without going into the merits of the matter and other issues, the matter needs to be remanded back to the Industrial Court solely for the purpose of deciding the issue No.1. The petitioners are permitted to lead the evidence only on the issue No.1.

In view thereof, petition is partly allowed.

The order dated 25.01.2024 in complaint ULP 22/2022 passed by the Industrial Court, Bhandara is set aside on the issue No.1 only.

In view thereof, writ petition stands disposed of.

(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)

manisha