JUDGMENT

P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.-Whether the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India was justified in reversing the award of the Industrial Court of Maharashtra and directing reinstatement of 72 workers? That is the question which is presented before us.

2. Three complaints filed before the Industrial Court under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act (for short the Act ) - two of them by the workers unions and the other by the Management of the industry -both alleging unfair labour practices under various clauses of the schedules to the Act, have eventually led to these appeals.

3. It is apparent from the record that the persons concerned (who, according to the Management, were only trainees) were not allowed to resume work on and from 14.8.1989 unless an undertaking on the terms imposed by the employer was given. According to the Management, their traineeship was terminated with effect from 15.11.1989. Some other workmen were later on employed by the appellant. The details of allegations and counter allegations as to what prompted the Management to dispense with their servic