Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the private respondents relied upon a decision of the Division Bench in the case of Mahesh Concern Workers' Union vs. M/s. M. Bhattacharya & Company Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., (MAT No.1788 of 2004 with FMA No. 812 of 2004) and submitted that where an industrial dispute is pending the Writ Court should not pass any order in the matter. He further submitted that in the instant case when the matter is pending before another forum the closure notice of suspension of work could not have been issued. He also relied upon the decision in the case of CPA Consultancy Services Private Limited Employees' Union & Ors. vs. CPA Consultancy Service Private Limited & Ors., reported in 1995 (I) CHN 224 and submitted that when there is an adequate alternative remedy is available the Writ Court should not interfere in the matter. According to him, the dispute between two private parties in the guise of police inaction the Court should not pass any order since the matter is awaiting adjudication before the competent forum.
It is true as has been held in CPA Consultancy Services Private Limited Employees' Union & Ors. (Supra) when the Court has dealt with the matter on a question that whether the Writ Court can interfere with the authority on the part of the police to take action on the basis of specific complaint made to it. The Division Bench of this High Court considered the position and held as follows :
"29. The first decision was of R. Vs. Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Ex. P. Blackhurn, reported in 1968 Vol. I All England Reporter page 763. At page 769 of the said Report, the learned Law Lord was pleased to say as follows :