9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 456X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 630 of the Companies Act would not be bad only because the permission required under section 33(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act is not obtained. Application cannot succeed. - CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2164 OF 2005 - - - Dated:- 22-8-2007 - S.R. DONGAONKAR, J. N.R. Saboo for the Applicant. K.S. Dhote and Mrs. Anjali Joshi for the Respondent. JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. N. R. Saboo, Advocate, for the applicant, Mr. K. S. Dhote, A.P.P. for respondent No. 1-State and Mrs. Anjali Joshi, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. 2. By this application under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant/accused in Criminal Complaint Case No. 1790/2002 filed by respondent No. 2 for the offence under section 630 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Act were filed by the complainant. 4. The reply by the accused/applicant was filed. In that complaint case, the applicant/accused filed an application for discharge, as stated above. His main contention was that the proceedings under section 630 of the Companies Act were not tenable inasmuch as a Labour Court proceedings in Misc. ULP Complaint No. 24/2000 for setting aside the relevant order of termination issued by the complainant were pending and the applicant/ accused therein had claimed reinstatement, by seeking quashing of the order of illegal termination. As this application was rejected by the learned trial Judge and the said order was confirmed in the revision application preferred by him, he has challenged those orders in thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nkarprasad Gopalprasad Pathak v. Lokmat Newspapers (P.) Ltd. 1997(1) Mh.L.J. 648, to contend that it was obligatory on the part of complainant to obtain prior permission of the Labour Court before resorting to file the complaint under section 630 of the Companies Act. 6. As against this, Learned counsel Mrs. Anjali Joshi, for respondent No. 2 has contended that as the applicant/accused was not in service after his termination, the allotment of quarter which was part of condition of his service, ceases to be in existence and therefore, he was required to vacate the said quarter. She has further contended that as there was no status quo in respect of services of the applicant/accused, he was not entitled to retain the quarter. She ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be entitled to retain the accommodation allotted to him by virtue of his service condition. Needless to mention that if anybody is appointed by the complainant-Company in his place, he would be entitled for residential accommodation, which obviously cannot be granted to him, if the applicant remains in possession of the same, despite he being not in the service of the company. 8. It is true that section 33(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, referred above, requires permission of the concerned Labour Court, before the service conditions of the employee are altered. But here is the case where the service condition of the applicant/accused is not changed, in fact he has been terminated. Therefore, even if it is assumed for a moment that he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
