JUDGMENT - KHANDEPARKAR R.M.S., J.:-Heard the learned Advocate for the parties. Perused the records.

2. The short point which arises for consideration is that on final disposal of the complaint under MRTU PULP Act, 1971, (hereinafter called as “the said Act”) whether the Labour Court would have the power to review its judgment. The facts of the case disclose that the workman filed the complaint under the said Act before the Labour Court alleging unfair labour practice under Item No. 1 of Schedule IV of the said Act. After hearing the parties, the Labour Court by its order dated 20th April, 1994 directed reinstatement of the workman with continuity in service and full back wages from 6th December, 1984. The respondents filed an application for review of the said order being Misc. Review Application (ULP) No. 10 of 1994. The same was allowed by the Labour Court by its order dated 15th July, 1994. The workman filed revision application being Application (ULP) No. 1000 of 1994 before the Industrial Court which came to be rejected by an order dated 27th October, 1999. The workman thereafter filed the Review Application being Application (ULP) No. 26 of 1999 before the Industrial Court.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document