Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 58897 (BOM)

MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THR. ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, WARDHA v. HORESHWAR S/O SHANKARRAO DEOGADE

WP/2196/2024 · 2025-07-29

Shri Sachin S Deshmukh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 letter 2282.25.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Letter OW No.2282/2025 in Writ Petition No.2196/2024 (D) MSRTC , Wardha V Horeshwar - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------------------- Mr. V.H. Kedar, Advocate for petitioner. CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR , J. DATE : 11-11-2025. It is brought to the notice of the Court that Complaint (ULP) No.122/2023 was already decided by the Industrial Court within time and the compliance was placed on record. However, on 03-11-2025, Counsel for petitioner inadvertently submitted that the matter was listed for extension of time for deciding the said complaint case. On the basis of submissions, an order dated 03-11-2025 came to be passed granting extension of time. 2. It is now clarified that the Complaint (ULP) No.122/2023 is already decided and the compliance is required to be taken note of. 3. In view of this, order dated 03-11-2025 granting extension of time is of no relevance. The same is modified by clarifying that the Complaint (ULP) No.122/2023 is decided and compliance is noted. (Prafulla S. Khubalkar , J. ) Deshmukh