The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Company's intention to remove machinery during a legal strike constituted an unfair labor practice under Item 8 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act, and the strike was legal in respect of the demand for abolition of contract labor.

Nishita Mhatre, J.

Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent.

This writ petition has been filed by a Trade Union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. It represents the workmen employed with the Respondent No. 1-Company. The Petition has been filed to challenge the order dated October 15, 2010 passed by the Industrial Court, Thane in Complaint (ULP) No. 174/2010, allowing the Respondents to resile from the statement made on their behalf by their advocate, that they were not going to remove the plant and machinery from their Airoli establishment. For the sake of convenience, the Petitioner will be referred to as "the Union" and the Respondents will be referred to as "the Company". The facts giving rise to the present Petition are as follows:

2. The Company is engaged in the business of printing and runs Printing Presses all over India. It commenced operations in the Press at Airoli, Navi Mumbai in 2005. About 160 permanent workmen employed in the establishment at Airoli formed the Union on April 30, 2010 and registered it under the provisions of the Trade Unions Act, 1926. The Company was informed about the formation of the Union by a letter dated May 11, 2010. The Union also called upon the Company not to remove any machinery which was being used in the Airoli Press out of the premises of the establishment. A meeting was also sought by the Union with the officers of the Company in order to discuss several pending grievances of the workers. The Company replied to the letter of the Union and called upon it to prove that the workmen had formed the Union. It also conceded that it was intending to shift the machinery and that it was being done in the best interest of the Company. The Company also disclosed that once the machinery was shifted the employees in the Airoli Unit would be suitably utilized or deployed in either the local Unit or in the Press where the machinery was being shifted. A Charter of Demands was submitted by the Union on May 26, 2010 The demands raised pertained to 30 demands including revision in wages, dearness allowance etc. as well as abolition of contract labour. Since the Union was not called for any discussions, it sent a reminder to the Company on June 5, 2010. According to the Union, the Company did not pay any heed to its demands and, therefore, it filed a complaint on June 1, 2010 alleging that certain unfair labour practices had been committed by the Company under Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of the Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, (for short "the MRTU & PULP Act") The complaint was registered as Complaint (ULP) No. 148/2010. The Union pleaded that the workers were made to work overtime for at least four hours each day but were not paid wages in consonance with the law. The Union also alleged that the Company had started victimizing the workmen for having joined the: Union and for having submitted a Charter of Demands. An injunction was sought against the Company from removing the raw materials, semi finished goods, finished goods and plant and machinery from the factory premises i.e. the Press.

3. The Union then issued a notice to the Company on June 9, 2010 declaring that a strike would be commenced from June 26, 2010 in respect of the Charter of Demands submitted to the Company. One of the active members of the Union was immediately issued a letter transferring him to the Company's Unit at Faridabad. That order was challenged by the Union in Complaint (ULP) No. 182/2010. the Industrial Court refused to stay the transfer order. The Union challenged the order passed in this Court in a writ petition. The Company, withdrew the transfer order and therefore the writ petition was also withdrawn.

4. It appears that the Company was restrained, by the Industrial Court by its order dated June 11, 2010 passed in Complaint (ULP) No. 148/2010, from removing the raw materials, plant and machinery from the factory premises. The Company