IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11100 of 2025 ============================================================== TORRENT POWER SURAT ELECTRICITY COMPANY EMPLOYEES UNION Versus TORRENT POWER LIMITED ============================================================== Appearance: MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR KUNAN B NAIK(3210) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ============================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Date : 06/02/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. Present petition is led by the petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Gujarat Industrial Relations Act seeking following reliefs: “a. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set-aside the impugned order dated 09-05-2025 passed by Learned Industrial Court, Surat below Exh-22 in Reference (IC) No. 1 of 2023 and further may be pleased to allow the application Exh- 22. b. Pending the admission hearing and 0nal disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble court may be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Reference (IC) No. 1 of 2023 pending before Learned Industrial Court, Surat. c. Any other and further relief or reliefs to which this Hon'ble Court deemed 0t, in the interest of justice, may kindly be granted.” p. 1 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, the petitioner is the only representative union representing the employees working in Torrent Power Surat Electricity Company. That, the petitioner had approached respondent No.5 by way of notice of change under Section 42 (2) of the Act read with Rule 52 of the Gujarat Industrial Relations Rules, 1962 and conciliation proceedings were started by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour. That, the respondent had also issued notice of change under Section 42 to the petitioner and pursuant to the said notice here also conciliation proceedings were initiated by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour. That, upon disagreement between parties, Assistant Commissioner of Labour closed the proceedings and informed the petitioner that the failure report will be sent to Labour Gandhinagar Commissioner & Chief Conciliator under the Gujarat Industrial Relations Act. That, since despite the conclusion of conciliation proceedings, failure report was not submitted of the petitioner, approached this Court by way of Special Civil Application No.5528 of 2023. That, only after the intervention of this Court and initial notice issued by this Court, the petitioner got failure certi cate and got its Reference registered before the Learned Industrial Court, Surat being Reference (IC) No.1 of 2023. That, the said application came to be rejected by the learned Labour Court. That, Review application was led by the respondent and application was given (below Exh.13) that while review application is pending, proceedings may not be further proceeded. That, when the said application was rejected the respondent led its written statement wherein the respondent took a plea that the present respondent is a di7erent unit altogether therefore, petitioner led application (below Exh.17) inter alia demanding certain p. 2 documents. That, the Industrial Court, by recording contentions of both the sides but without recording any reasons, rejected the application for production of document below Exh.22. 3. Being aggrieved and dissatis ed with the impugned order dated 09.05.2025 passed by the Industrial Court, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. 4. Heard Mr. Dipak Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kunan Naik, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the materials available on record. 5. Learned counsel Mr. Dave has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Industrial Court is illegal, unjust, arbitrary, erroneous and contrary to the facts and material on record and the provisions of the Act and therefore, is required to be quashed and set aside. He has submitted that the Industrial Court has not considered the fact that the documents sought are relevant, vital and important to decide the controversy on hand and therefore, the same are required to be produced by the other side. He has submitted that the respondent has several other units at other places where same type of activities are carried out and the conditions of the service of those employees are similar to that of the petitioner. He has submitted that the Industrial Court has failed to appreciate the fact that no prejudice will be caused to the respondent if the documents of the case are produced on record. Over and above the grounds agitated in the memo of petition, learned counsel Mr. Dave has urged that the impugned order passed by the Industrial Court is required to be quashed and set aside and the present petition is p. 3 required to be allowed. 6. As against that, learned counsel Mr. Naik, appearing for the respondent, has opposed the present petition and submitted that there is no any in rmity or any illegality in the impugned order passed by the Industrial Court and therefore, no interference is required to be called for in the present petition. He has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Industrial Court is in consonance with the settled principles of law and is passed after following due procedure and therefore, the same is required to be con rmed and the present petition is required to be dismissed and no interference is required to be called for while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 7. Having considered the facts of the case and the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties and perused the impugned order, I am of the opinion that the matter is required to be remanded back to the Industrial Court for fresh decision and the petition deserves to be allowed. 8. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. The impugned order passed below Exh. 22 is hereby quashed and set aside. The aforesaid reference is ordered to be restored to its original le. The matter is remanded back to the Industrial Court for fresh decision. The Industrial Court is directed to hear and decide the matter, after considering the contentions/submissions agitated by the respective parties permissible under the law, as p. 4 expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. The parties to the proceedings shall co-operate with the concerned authority for deciding the matter and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment. (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) ANUSRI p. 5 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: ANUSRI VASU(HC02352), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/02/2026 17:19:56