1 18-WP No.4056.2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4056 OF 2024 Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation through Executive Engineer, Pench irrigation Project, Nagpur Division and another ..VS.. Moreshwar Gajanan Kohale and others ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mrs. U. A. Patil, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. R. S. Bhure, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 7. Mr. N. S. Rao, Advocate for respondent No.9. CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J. DATED : 18 th M ARCH, 2025 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for the respondents. 2. The contention of the petitioners is that without there being any evidence on record, the learned Industrial Court passed the order below Exhibit U-2 application under Section 30(2) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. It is further contention of the petitioners is that the impugned order passed on 08.05.2024, directed to maintain status-quo in respect of service and service conditions of complainants till decision of complaint on merit. My attention is drawn by the learned Counsel for the petitioners to order dated 16.02.2023, passed below Exhibit U-7 application for grant of interim relief filed by the complainants. It was contention of the complainants that they are working on the post of ‘Security Guard’ with respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2025:BHC-NAG:2827 2 18-WP No.4056.2024 They have an apprehension that after filing the Complaint and after receiving the notice under Regulation 115, the respondents (petitioners herein) may take coercive action against them or may discontinue their services. However, the learned Industrial Court directed to maintain status-quo in respect of service. 3. It is submitted that when the complaint was filed, at that time only contract was came to an end on 09.02.2023. It is also drawn my attention to Annexure-F (page 95 of the petition), which is a list of Security Guard deployed by taking services of ‘Perfect Security Services’. 4. Learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the Industrial Court may be directed to decide the matter within a period of six months and if such directions are issued, he would not press for any contempt. 5. In my considered opinion, in fact, the respondents are directed to maintain status-quo, however, if any contempt proceeding are filed the respondents Security Guards shall not press for the same till decision in the Complaint ULP No.36/2023. The learned Industrial Court is directed to dispose of the Complaint (ULP) No.36/2023 within a period of six months. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) Kirtak