Bombay High Court
THE LATUR CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONERversusVIJAY MACHINDRA JADHAV
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The High Court held that it will not entertain the writ petitions as the main industrial‑court proceedings are pending and directed the Industrial Court to decide the complaints within a year.
Summary
The Latour City Municipal Corporation filed two writ petitions challenging orders dated 25‑02‑2022 passed by the Industrial Court in Complaint (ULP) Nos. 69 and 70 of 2021. The High Court observed that the substantive industrial‑court proceedings were still pending and therefore declined to entertain the petitions. It directed the Industrial Court to dispose of the main complaints within one year from the date of the order. The Court expressly stated that it was not expressing any view on the merits and that the Industrial Court must decide independently, irrespective of the dismissal of the writ petitions. Consequently, both writ petitions were disposed of, with all points kept open for the Industrial Court’s determination.
Issues considered
- The High Court’s jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition when the substantive industrial‑court proceedings are pending
- Whether the High Court should stay or interfere with the Industrial Court’s pending complaints
Subjects
- writ petition
- industrial court
- pending proceedings
- jurisdiction
- interim relief
- disposal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:16278
1 of 2 97-WP.13325.2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
97 WRIT PETITION NO. 13325 OF 2022
THE LATUR CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH ITS
COMMISSIONER
VERSUS
VIJAY MACHINDRA JADHAV
...
Mr. Hanmant V. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Tukaram M. Venjane, Advocate for Respondent.
...
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13327 OF 2022
THE LATUR CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH ITS
COMMISSIONER
VERSUS
LAXMAN BHUJANG GAIKWAD
…
Mr. Hanmant V. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Tukaram M. Venjane, Advocate for Respondent.
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 10th APRIL, 2026
P.C.:-
1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.
2. By the present petitions, the Petitioner assails the orders
dated 25.02.2022 passed below Exhibit U-2 by the learned Member,
Industrial Court, Latur in Complaint (ULP) Nos. 69 of 2021 and 70 of
2021.
3. It is submitted that the main proceedings are still pending. In
Tauseef
2 of 2 97-WP.13325.2022
view thereof, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present
petitions. However, the learned Industrial Court is directed to decide
the main complaints within a period of one year from today.
4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion
on the merits of the case and the learned Industrial Court shall decide
the proceedings independently, without being influenced by the
dismissal of the present petitions or any interim orders passed therein.
5. Hence, both the petitions stand disposed of. All points are
kept open.
(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)
Tauseef
Checking your session…